HomeMy WebLinkAbout1968-09'. •
·II
BOARDS O F DH1 ECTO RS
County Sanitati on Di stricts P. 0. Box ~ll'l!ic 8127
10844 Ellis Aven ue
Fountain Valley, Ca liF., 927013
of Orange Co unty, Calif ornia
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8) .
(10)
(11)
(12)
(1 3)
DIST RICT No.
AGENDA
September 24, 1968 -4 :30 p.m .
Ro ll Call
Appointments of Chairme n prp tern, if necessary
Report of the General Manager
Rep ort of the General Couns e l
DISTRICT 1
Consid eration of action rega rding award o f contract
for Enclosures, Phase II, and Operators' Building,
J ob No . P2-8-3 . (The Board may wish to rec ess to
di scuss matter with Building Co mmittee)
DISTRIC TS 1 Al~D 7
Consid eration of Resolution No . 68-79, approving and
authori zing execution of a Temporary Accommodation
Agreement between the Dist ric t s (Warner Bypass Agree -
ment), whereby District No . 7 may discharge sewage and
industria l waste effluent in to District l's Grand Avenue
Sew er in Wa rne r Avenue . See page 11 A" (S ee page
"B" for Ag r eement )
DIS TRICT 7
Consi deration of motion accepting proposal of Boyle
Engine ering, for preparation of plans and specifications
for the Warner Bypass Fac ili t i e s to connect to District
No . l's Grand Av enue Sewer . See page "C"
DIS TRICT 7
Discussion concerning the necessity of a Master Plan
Study for the District , prio r to the fixing of ultimate
joint outfall facilities requirements for Districts 1
and 7
DIS TRICT 7
Consi deration of a resolution establishing the District 's
Annexati on -Fee Policy and Procedures. See page "D"
DISTRIC T 7
Con sideration of Resolution No . 68-81-7 , approving plans
and specifications for the Sma lley Road Subtrunk Sewer ,
Contract No . 7-lG-A, and authorizing advertising for
bid s to be opened by the engineer and staff on October 11;
and authorizing award of contract . See page "E"
DISTRICTS 1 AND 7
Oth er business and communications
DISTRICT 1
Consid eration of motion to adjourn
DISTRICT 7
Consid e ro.tjon of motion to adjourn
RESOLUTION NO. 68-79
APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A
TEMPORARY ACCOMMODATION AGREEMENT WARNER
BYPASS AGREEMENT
A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS
OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1 AND 7,
OF ORANGE.COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AND
AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A TEMPORARY ACCOMMODA-
TION AGREEMENT (WARNER BYPASS AGREEMENT)
The Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts
• Nos. 1 and 7, of Orange County, California,
DO HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER:
Section 1. That the certain agreement dated September
24, 1968, by and between County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1 and 7,
entitled "Temporary Accommodation Agreement (Warner Bypass Agreement)"
is hereby approved; and,
Section 2. That the Chairmen and Secretary ·of County
Sanitation Districts Nos. l and 7 are authorized and directed to
\,,,,,,1 execute said agreement on behalf of. ·the Boards. of Directors.
Agenda Item #6 -A-Districts 1 and 7
r -
~ . ..
., ~-~~ ) . ·:; .. . .
. .
TEMPORARY ACCOMMODATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN
COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 1
AND COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 7
{WARNER BYPASS AGREEMENT)
THIS AGREEMENT made by and between COUNTY SANITATION
DISTRICT NO. 1 of Orange County, hereinafter calied "ONE" and •.
COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 7 of Orange County, hereinafter
called "SEVEN", on the day of , 1968.
~~--~~~~~~--~
WHEREAS, SEVEN is anticipating the receipt of sewage
effluent into its main sewer trunk system, i.e. (Redhill and
Gisler trunks), in excess of the capacity of said sewers; and,
WHEREAS, the planning,. financing and construction of
additional sewerage facilities required to alleviate the afore-
said inadequacy is estimated to require a period of three years;
and,
WHEREAS, ONE has excess capacity in its Graqd Avenue
trunk and the trunk sewers connecting said Grand Avenue trunk
with the joint treatment and disposal sewerage facilties of ONE
and SEVEN; and,
WHEREAS, the above-mentioned excess capacities of ONE
are expected to be available for a period of three to five years:
NOW, THEREFORE, I~ CONSIDERATION OF THE PREMISES and
for other valuable c~nsideration, it is mutually agreed as follows:
(1). ONE agrees to permit SEVEN to construct and maintain
a bypass sewerage facility to connect into ONE 1 s Grand Avenue
sewer in Warner Avenue at the most easterly manhole thereof and
to discharge not to exceed 5.0 MGD (peak_ ca~acities) of sewage
·...._,,; and industrial waste effluent into ONE's sewerage system. ONE
agrees to transport said sewage and industrial waste through its
sewerage system to the joint treatment and disposal facilities of
ONE and SEVEN at Plant No. 1.
Agenda Item #6 B-1 Districts 1 & 7
'--··· ··•··
'I
:I 1: ,
, ...
(2) SEVEN agrees to pay ONE a sum equal to $15.00
per MGD of sewage and industrial waste discharged into ONE's
system at the Warner Avenue Bypass. On January 1, 1973 the rate
shall change to $45.00 per MGD and thereafter shall increase
at the rate of $15.00 per MGD annually.
(3) A report of the amounts of sewag~ and industrial
waste transported in accordance with this agree~ent shall be
made by the General Manager of each District on or about Jul~ 1,
t
of each calendar year. The payments due shall be made upon
acceptance of said reports.
(4) As further consideration for this agreement,
SEVEN agrees to discour~ge sizable annexations of territory to
itself which are likely to.overload its inadequate trunk sewer
capacities.
(5) This agreement shall continue in full force and
effect until changed or terminated by mutual agreement: provided
~ that either District may terminate this agreement upon giving
written notice to the other one year in advance of a designated
termination date.
Agenda Item #6 B-2
COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 1
of Orange County, California
By~~~~..--~~~~~~~~~~..--..--~
Chairman of its Board of Directors
ATTEST:
Secretary of its Board of Directors
COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 7
of Orange County, California
BY~---...--~~~__,....--~..--..--~~~-:--..--..----
Ch airman of its Board of Directors
ATTEST:
Secretary of its· Board of Directors
Districts 1 & 7
~·
ENGINEERS• ARCHITECTS
412 SOUTH LYON STREET • SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92702 • TELEPHONE <714> 547-4471
ADDRESS REPLY TO P.O. BOX 178
September 18, 1968
Board of Directors
County Sanitation District No. 7
of Orange County
Post Office Box 5175
Fountain Volley, CA 92708
Gentlemen:
Pursuant to Mr. Harper's reque:St, we ore pleased to submit our proposal for
furnishing engineering services for the preparation of plans and spec ificotions
for P Ion A-2 foci I ities as presented in the report on temporary r~ lief measures
for the Gisler-Red Hill Trunk, dated Moy 1?68 by Boyle Engineering.
"Plan A-2 consists of a relief line parallel to the Red Hill Trunk between Mitchell
and .Valencia Avenues and a pumping station at Worner Avenue and Red Hill
Avenue with a 14-inch force main running westerly on Warner Avenue to the
Warner Avenue Trunk Sanitation District No. 1. This system will provide 5 mgd
temporary relief, which should extend the functional life of the present District
No. 7 outfo II syst_em three years (end of 1972) without inhibiting growth within
the present district boundaries.
We will perform th~ following professiono I engineering services for the above
des~ribed re lief system.
a. Hold conferences with representatives of the district, property owners
or leasees involved, interested cities, and other pubBc agencies and
others to review and discuss all aspects of the pr:oiect.
· b. Make orrangel'!lents for and coordination of fie Id surveys, I ego I
descriptions, soils investigations, and pavement coring.
c. Prepare preliminary engineering studies and design for review and approval.
d. Pr~pare engineering data for regulatory permit applications that may be
required by the City of Tustin, county of Orange and State Division of
Highways.
e. Prepare detail plans and specifications.
f. Prepare estimates .of quantities and costs.
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES
Agenda Item #7 C-1 District 7
Board of Directors
County Sanitati9n District No. 7
of Orange County
September 18, 1968
Page 2
g. Deliver the original tracings of the plans and reprod_ucible plates of ·
the specifications for the district's use in prepori'ng the nece~sary number
of copies for record purposes, distribution to prospective bidders, etc •.
• h. Assist the district or its agent in securing bids, tabulation and analysis of
bid results and in letting of contract.
i. Check shop and working drawings as may be submitted by the contractor.
j. Review laboratory reports on materials tests and inspections and correlate
such reports with the intentions of the plans and specifications.
k. Furnish consultation and advice to the district or its agent during
construction.
I. Furnish periodic observations of construction work and progress and
provide appropriate reports to the district.
m. Opserve initia I operation of the proiect, witnessing performance tests as
required by the specifications and reportin_g same to the district.
n. Make a fina I inspection and report of the comp feted proiect with a
representative of the district or its agent. ·
o •. Prepare record drawings ("os-constructe·d 11
) when construction wor.k has
been completed and accepted by the district. This sha II mean the origina I
tracings of the plans will be modified, if necessary, because of deviations
from the origina I work. When inspection is carried out by personne I not
directly employed by the engineer, modificat.ions to the original tracings
will be based upon information supplied to the engineer by the district.
The original tracings after being modified will become district property.
It is suggested that the proposed work be divided into two contracts. One contract
consisting of the gravity relief sewer and the force mo in and the other for the
pumping station. We propose to provide the services in items a through o for the
gravity and force main contract or c basic fee of $14,200; likewise, the same basic
services for the pumping station contract for a fee of $9 ,000. We suggest that payment
be monthly on a percentage completed basis up to 90% at time of delivery-of plans
and specifications with 100% payment when the work is completed and accepted by
the district.
There will be field surveys requ.ired in order to prepare the plans and specifications.
These surveys will include taking topography and culture within the proiect's limits.
We propose that a II field surveys necessary for design be performed on a per diem
basis at our per diem rates currently on file with the district.
BOYLE ENGINEERING
Agenda Item #7 C-2 District 7
Board of Directors
County Sanitation District No. 7
of Orange County
September 18, .1968
Page 3
If any revisions are required by major changes in the scope of the proiect after
the preliminary drawings are approved or after the fina I p Ions are comp feted .
and such revisions are ordered by the district, we will perform such additiona I
work at the current per diem rate. ·
We propose that all outside services that are required and approved by the
district such as soils investigations, plant inspection .for quality control for
materials used on project construction will be paid directly by the district upon
presentation of a statement for such outside services with the engineer's
certification •.
All additional engineering work and services such as legal descriptions,
construction staking, and construction inspection will be compensated at the
current per diem rates •. Payment to be monthly as invoiced.
If we are authorized to proceed with th is work at the September 24 meeting
of the Board of Directors, we can have plans and specifications ready for the
Board's approval at the February, 1969. boar? meeting. · ·
&t1:.,t1:t.L~hrl4~1/~ /
Conrad Hohener, Jr., C. E. 10951
Principal Engineer
BOYLE ENGINEERING
Agenda Item #7 C-3 District 7
ENGINEERING
0
ENGINEERS e ARCHITECTS
412 SOUTH LYON STREET • SANTA ANA. CALIFORNIA 92702 • TELEPHONE <714> 547-4471
ADORES~ REPLY TO P.O. BOX 178
July 25, 1968
Board of Directors
County Sanitation District No. 7
of Orange County
Post Office Box 5175
Fountain Val fey / CA 92708
Pursuant to your authorizatio~ of Apri I 10, 1968, we have proceeded with
a reappraisal of the annexation fee schedule for the District. We have also
prepared a procedure for annexations of territory to the District with a
suggested fee for processing costs.
In reappraising the annexation fee, the basic philosophies employed in prior
studies were generally followed. Briefly enumerated they are:
1. Excluded areas have relinquished rights in all District
facilities, existing and under construction.
2. Additional sewerage facilities required within the
annexed areas are to be constructed without cost to
existing taxpayers of District. ·
3. Existing facilities and those under construction will
serve the existing District for a specific period of time,
and the taxpayers have assumed the obligation and have
the obi lity to pay for these foci Ii ties without assistance
from outside areas.
4. After annexation new areas should be on the same basis
as the rest of the District in solving long range future
requirements for sewerage foci I ities.
In reassessing th~ present fee schedule, four methods previously used in exami-
nation of the problem were again considered. They ore: back taxes, value-
appraisal of lands before and after, value-cost by alternative system, and
area benefit/ cost. Lands considered most likely to request annexation in the
future and which could be integrated into the existing system from on engineering
and economic standpoint were analyzed. These lands, for the most part, consist
of Lemon Heights, Cov1an Heights, Orange Park Acres, Peters Canyon and
certain Irvine lands to the southeast of the Browning Subtrunk. Total acreage
r -
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES
Agenda Item #9 D-1 District 7
.··
c.-••
Board of Directors .
County Sanitation District No. 7
of Orange County
July 25, 1968
Page Two
. involved is approximately 8, 800 acres. However, this is riot to be miscon-
strued as recommending acceptance of any of these areas for annexation.
Due to the limited capacities of the existipg trunk foci lities, only a limited
portion of the study area con be annexed until the ultimate system is con-
structed. We will comment about this later in the report.
As a result of this reappraisal it is our recommendation that the following
requirements, of which some are presently in effect, be continued and/or
established as conditions to the annexation of territory to the District.
1. Payment of all costs incurred in processing the annexation.
2. Payment to the District the sum of $250. oq per acre of
territory so· annexed.
3o That annexed territor.y be subiect to the terms and conditions
of all ordinances pertaining to fees for connection to the
District's facilities.
4. The annexed territory shal I be an~exed into an appropriate
sewering agency for the purpose of maintaining and
operating the local sewer system including pumping stations
and force mains.
S. The local sewerage system serving the annexation area shall
be irJstalled and connected to the District's system without
expense to the District.
6. The territory upon annexation shol I be subiect to al I
ad valorum taxes required for the retirement of the
existing and future bonds of the District.
At the present time approximately 50 percent of the p6tentiol connections
within the present District ore connected to the District's facilities. Because
. of the large number of connections remaining to be mode and the capacity
problems in the Gisler-Red Hil I Trunk, it is our recommendation that no rarge
areas be annexed to the District until the ultimate trunk facilities· are con-·
structed. Certain fringe areas contiguous to the ·District, principally in the
Lemon Heights, Cowan Heights, and the westerly section of Orange Park Acres
could be ·annexed without bei.ng detrimental to the best intere~ts of lands
presently within the District. However, before proceeding too far w·ith any
annexation request, the District should evaluate the effect additional sewage
will hove on existing facilities.
0r._,u.cfJ,-J/-r-ll1u.JJ,Z.
Conrod Hohener, Jr., C.E. 10951
pp
81-2908-00-00
BOYLE ENGINEERING
Agenda Item #9 D-2 District 7
PROCEDURE:
COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 7 OF ORANGE COUNTY
10844 Ellis Ayenue, Post Office Box 5175
Fountain Volley, California 92708
(714) 540-2910 {714) 962-2411
PROCEDURE AND FEES FOR ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY TO THE DISTRICT
1. All requests for annexation MUST be in writing and directed to the Board of Directors of
County Sanitation District No. 7 of Orange County.
2. Such written request MUST contain the following:
· (a) The true ond correct and complete •egal description of the territory for.which
annexation is requested. TAX Bl LL DE SC RI PTI ONS AND ASSESSMENT NUMBERS ARE NOT
ADEQUATE.
(b) The names, addresses and telephone numbers of every owner within said territory
and a designation of the portion or the interest owned by each person.
(c) The assessed value of each separate parcel of land within the territory having a
separate assessment, as shown on the last preceding equalized assessment roll of Orange County.
(d) The total number of voters, if any, residing in the territory proposed for annexation.
(e) Said written request must request the District to annex said territory.
3. Fees to be paid; when and how:
(a) When written request is filed, it mu.st be accompanied by a CASHIER'S CHECK
payable to County Sanitation District No. 7 of Orange County in the sum of $325.00. .
Shou Id these processing costs exceed the $325. 00 fee, opp Ii cants wi II be requested
to deposit the amount of such excess with the District.
NO PART of this charge is refund ab le under any circumstances.
' (b) The formal petition for annexation is prepared by the District and mailed to
appli.cont for signature with a letter of instructions and a statement of the additional fees. When
the oppli cont signs and returns the formal petition for annexation, it must be accompanied by
A CASHIER'S CHECK equal to a fee of $250.00 per· acre for each acre to be
annexed. This fee is refundable if the annexation fails.
NOTE: All moneys paid to the District must be by cash, cashier's check, postal
or bank money order or certified check. NO PERSONAL CHECKS WI LL BE ACCEPTED.
_ _ . The above ·fees are subiect to change.· The fee schedule in effect at the time of
actual payment of any fee is the one applicable.
4. It is the policy of the District n9t to accept for annexation any irregularly shaped territory
which consists of subdivisions or proposed subdivisions where isolated parcels of property or lots are
excluded from or ore not included within the territory to be annexed.
5. It is essential to allow 60 days from the time formal petition is signed and fees ore paid.
Positively no use of District sewer lines unti I ofter date of hearing.
Agenda Item #9 D-3 District 7
RESOLUTION NO. 68-81-7
APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE
SMALLEY ROAD SUBTRUNK SEWER, CONTRACT NO.
7-lG-A
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 7, OF ORANGE
COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE SMALLEY ROAD SUB-
TRUNK SEWER, CONTRACT NO. 7-lG-A; AUTHOR-
IZING ADVERTISING FOR BIDS TO BE OPENED
BY THE ENGINEER AND STAFF ON OCTOBER 11;
AND AUTHORIZING AWARD OF CONTRACT
The Board of Directors of County Sanitation District
No. 7, of Orange County, California,
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER:
Section 1. That the detailed plans, specifications
and contract documents this day submitted to the Board of Directors
by Donald E. Stevens, Inc., Consulting engineers, for construction
of SMALLEY ROAD SUBTRUNK SEWER, CONTRACT NO. 7-lG-A, are hereby
approved and adopted; and,
Section 2. That the Secretary. be authorized and directed
to advertise for bids for said work pursuant to the provisions of
the Health and Safety Code of the State of California; and,
Section 3. That said bids will be received until
4:00 p.m., October 11, 1968, at which time said bids will be publicly
opened and read; and,
Section 4. That the Secretary of the Board end the
Consulting Engineer be authorized to ~pen said bids on behalf
of the Board of Directors; and,
Section 5. That the Chairman and Secretary, upon written
recommendation of the design engineer as to the successful low
·bidder, be authorized to execute the contract.
Agenda Item #lC -E-District 7
. "
II
MANAGER'S AGENDA REPORT
County Sanitation Districts
of Orange County, California
JOINT BOARDS
P. 0. Box 5 175
10844 Ellis Avenue
Fountain Valley, Calif., 92708
Telephones :
Aree Code 7 14
540-2910
962-2411
Septemb er 6, 1968
REGULAR MEET ING
Wednesday, Septemb e r 11, 1968
7 :30 p.m.
The following is a brief exp lanation of the more important non-
routine items which appear o n the enc l osed agenda and which are not
otherwise self -exp l anatory . Warrant l ists are not attached to the
agenda since th ey are made up immed iately preceding th e meeting but
wi ll appea r in the comp l e t e agenda available at the meeting .
Joint Boards
Nos. 14 and 15 -CONS I DERATION OF ACTION ON BI DS (PLA NT JOB NO.
P2-8-3): This job, as the Directors will recall, is for ENCLOSURES -
PHASE II and OPERATORS' BU ILDING at Plant No . 2 and has been planned
and budget e d for several years It is hoped that the work can
commence this fal l immediately after c o mpletion of the new Headworks
"C" construction in o rder that our l ong -range program for improve -
ment in the appearance of Plant No. 2 can b e substantially complete
by next summer . Bids for this new job we r e taken on August 29 and
a bid tabulation is enclosed with the agenda material . Th e bids
received much exceeded the approved budget allo tment ($230,000) and
the engineer 's estimate of $1 92,800 (for "tilt -up" construction
alternate ).
At our request, th e design engineers have submitted a letter
(see agenda page F -1) analyz i ng the discrepancy between est i ma t e and
actual bids .
After reviewing the engineers' letter I discuss ed thi s entire
matter with our Building Committee Chairman, Director Miller, and
since there appears to be no clear-cut course t o follow, it is our
recommendation that the Boards author i ze t he employment of one or
more architectural consultants (A genda It e m No . 14) for the purpose
of reviewing the project and the bids r eceived for its construction,
and that the Districts proceed on th e basis of the consultants '
r ecomme ndation.
We also re commend that the District No . 1 Board be given the
authority to award the contract upon receipt of the written recom -
mendation of the consultant(s) and co ncurr ence of the Engineers and
General Manager, at an adjourned meeting to be held September 24
(Agenda It em No . 1 5).
No . 16 -APPROVAL OF PLAN S AND SPEC I F I CATIONS FOR PLANT J OB NO . I-7-1
AND P2 -1 3 -l : I n acco r dance with our approved Plant Construction
Budg e t and Schedul e for 1968-69, the next contract to be awarded is
a major p i ping job at Plant No . 2 . This work will consist of a
portion of two separa t e budget item s wh ich were comb i ned into o n e
contra ct for reasons o f eco nomy and to expedite the above -de s cribed
program of improv em e nts in the appearance of Plant No . 2 . The piping
involve d includes a new 42 -inch raw sewa ge bypass l ine at Plant No . 2
connecting our 66 -inc h effluent line from Plant No. 1 t o t he new
Headworks "c" and a parallel 108 -inch prima ry efflu ent line to serve
future sedimentation basins at Plant No . 2 . The wo rk a lso includes
a r athe r e laborate junctio n box connecting these fac ilities with
existing pipe l ines .
Plans and specifications for this new job are in t he process
of being com plet ed a nd it is recommended t hat advertising for bids
be authorized t o be received on October 31, with awa rd scheduled
at the regular Novembe r Board meeting . The enginee r's e stimate
for th i s job is $269,000 .
No . 17 -CHANGE ORDER NO . 3, PLANT JOB NO . P2 -ll: As reported in
the Manage r's Report for the August Board meeting, work on this Pl ant
job, Headworks 11 c 1
' at Pla nt No . 2, is scheduled for completion next
mo n th . During the design of the wo rk described in the preceding
item? it became obvious t hat that portion of the latter connecting
the 4 2 -inc h raw sewage bypass line to the new Headworks could be
accomplished much cheaper by the Headwork s' contractor. The basic
r eason for this is that the present contractor i s set up for de -
wate r ing and a portion of his work calls f o r excavation in the same
area . We have asked the Headworks' contractor, J . Putnam Henck , to
subm i t a quotat i on for the additiona l work i nvolved of i nstalling
approxi mately 29 feet of vitri f i ed clay p i pe and a connection with
the new Headworks . His quotat i o n o f $3,670 has been analyzed and
i t is recommended that he be authorized to proceed with the extra
work (Item 2 of t he formal change order enclosed with the agenda
material). I n addi tio n , the r ecommended change order includes a
re v ision to the engine cooling piping system in the amount of $717 ,
for a total addition to t h e co ntract price of $4,387.
District No . 1
No . 23 -ADJOURNMENT TO SEPTEM BE R 24 : It i s suggested that the Board
adjourn to the hour o f 4:30 p .m., September 24, to meet jo i ntly with
the District No . 7 Board. Th e princip~l r eason fo r this adjournment
i s to consider and take action, jo i ntly with District No . 7, on
the proposed agreement between the Districts for the temporary
disposal o f sewage from the District No . 7 system to the District No .
1 system . Preparation of this agreement was authorized at t he July
23 adjourned meet ing of the two Di strict Boards . This adjourned
Board meeting will immediately precede the n e xt scheduled ~eeting of
the Executive Committ e e .
-2 -
District No . 2
No. 24 -APPROVAL OF PLANS AND SPEC IFI CATIONS, CONTRACT NO . 2-10 -9
(EUCLID TRUNK SEWER ): Plane and spec ifi cations for this project are
now ready for bidding. The contract wil l cover the last remaining
segment of the paralleling of the o l d Euclid Trunk Sewer. The co n-
struction has been progressing on a pay-as-you-go basis since 1 964.
The work basically i s for approxima tely two miles of 33-inch vitrified
clay pipe sewer between Chapman Avenue and Ball Road i n the cities
of Garden Grove and Anaheim . Complet i on of this project, at an
estimated c o nstruction cost of $530,000, is schedul ed for the summer
of 1 969 and will provide re lief for the existing Magno lia Trunk
Sewer as well as better future sewer service for the cities along
its route.
Bids on this job are scheduled to be taken on Oc t ober 7 and i f
i n order , the recommendation for award wi ll be made at the regular
meeting in October.
No. 25 -AGREEMENT WITH SOUTHERN PAC I FIC COMPANY: The above-described
trunk sewer project will cross the Southern Pacific Company right of
way between Katella and Cerritos Avenues . The Company requires, in
such cases, that a formal agreement be executed before actual con-
structio n is commenced .
District No. 3
No. 29 -REPORT OF ENGINEER ON MANHO LE DAMAGE DUE TO FAILURE OF
COATINGS: After an extens ive di scussion at the Augus t Board meeting
concerning the basis for sett l ement of the District's lawsuit for
damages r esulting from manhole coating failure, the engi neers and
staff were directed to study the extent of the damages and report t o
the Board in order that a basis of settlement could be establishe d .
Immediately after the meeting Mr. Conrad Hohener , of Boyle Engineer -
ing, supervised an inspection of those manholes known, from previo u s
inspection s , to be severely damaged and will report to the Board on
his findings and estimates as to a dol l ar amount of the damage .
Di s tri ct No. 7
No. 39 -RECOMMENDED ACTION REGARDING PREPAYMENT OF CONNEC TION
CHARGES : At the Joint meeting in August, the Board author i zed the
construction of a proposed Master Plan sewer in Smalley Road wh i ch
was requested by the Costa Mesa Sanitary District . The Sanitary
Di strict has offered to finance the construction of this facility
from the connection -charge funds accumul ated in their District No . 7
Fund . They have asked the deve l oper who proposes a development of
300 homes which will be served by this subtrunk sewer to prepay the
connection charges wh i ch total approximately $15,000 .
Since the developer will not build all of these homes at one
time, he would like some assurance from the Board that in the event
-3 -
he does not construct them all, that the District will enter into a
standard Master Plan Reimbursement Agreement for any prepaid fees not
applicable to the houses constructed.
No . 44 -AD J OURNMENT TO SEPTEMBER 24 : As described under Item No .
23, a joint meeting of Districts Nos. 1 and 7 is scheduled for 4:30
p.m ., September 24, immediately preceding the next regular meeting
of the Executive Committee. In ad di t i on to the joint agreement of
District No . 1 , described under I tem No. 23, it is expected that the
Di strict No . 7 Board will have othe r items of business to take up,
including authorizing advert i sing for b i ds for the Smalley Road Sub -
Trunk Sewer.
District No. 11
No. 45 -J OINT MEETING WITH SUNSET BEACH SANITARY DISTRICT BOARD:
At the adjourned meeting of the Board on August 28, it was suggested
that the California Regional Water Quality Control Board would per -
haps wish to sponsor a joint meeting of the District No . 11 Board
and the Sunset Beach Sanitary District Board in order to discuss
possible sewer service to the Sunset Beach area by District No . 11 .
We have just received a letter (copy in agenda material) from Mr.
Richa r d Bueermann, Executive Officer of the Quality Control Board,
suggesting such a meeting to discuss this matter. If the Sanitary
District Board is also agreeable to t he proposed meeting, it can
probably be arranged for the latter part of September, in which case
a special Board meeting can be called by the Chairman.
Nos . 46 and 47 -COMPLETION OF MANHOLE REPAIR CONTRACT : The con -
tractor on this job (Manhole Reconstruct i on, Phase I, Contract No.
11 -llR -l) is successfully completing his work this week and it wil l
be recommended that the work be accepted at this meeting . The start
of the work was delayed for some time awa i ting receipt by the
contractor of the formal excavation perm it from the State Division
of Highways. Accordingly, by mean s of Change Order No . 1, we are
recommending that an extension of time o f 15 days be granted for
this reason (It em No. 46).
I tem No . 47 is the customary resolution accepting the job as
complete on September 5 and authorizing f i ling of a Notice of
Completion.
-4 -
Fred A. Harper
General Manager
•
II
BO ARDS O F D IREC TORS
County Sanitat io n Di stricts ~ r(/'-v{.
of O range County, Celifornia ;:j Q,i'~d P. 0. Bo x 51 75
10844 El li s Aven ue
Foun ta in Volley, C al if., 92708
JOI NT BOARD S
AGEN D A
Se p te mber 11, 1968 -7 :3 0 p.m .
(1 ) P l ed ge of Alleg i ance
(2 ) Ro ll Cal l
(3 ) Appointments of Chairmen pro tern , i f necessary
(4 ) DIS TRICT 1
Con sideration o f motion approving minutes of the regular
meeting he l d August 14 , 1968 , as mailed
(5 ) DI STRICT 2
Con siderat i on o f mot i on approving minutes of the r egular
meeting he l d August 1 4 , 1968 , as ma iled
(6 ) DI STRICT 3
Consideration of motion approving minutes of the regular
meeting he l d August 14 , 1968 , as mailed
(7 ) DISTRICT 5
Considerat i on of mot i o n approving minutes of the regular
meeting held Aug u st 14 , 1968 , and the special meeting
he ld September 5 , 1968
(8 ) DISTRICT 6
(9 )
(1 0 )
(11 )
(12 )
(1 3 )
Consideration of motion approving mi n utes of the regu lar
meet i ng he l d Au g u st 14 , 1 968 , as mai l e d
DISTRICT 7
Consideration of motion approving minutes of the regular
meeting held August 14 , 1 968 , as mailed
DISTRICT ll
Consideration of motion approving minutes of the regular
meeting held August 14 , 1 968 , and the adjourned regular
meeting thereof held August 28 , 1968
ALL DISTRICTS
Report of the Joint Chairman
ALL DISTRICTS
--neport of the General Manager
ALL DISTRICTS
Report of the General Counsel
(14)
(15)
(16)
(17)
(18)
(19)
(20)
ALL DISTRICTS
Consideration of motion to receive and file bid tabulation
for Job No. P2-8-3 (Enclosures, Phase II and Operators'
Building); and authorizing employment of architectural
consultants to review the plans and bids and to recommend
whether or not the contract should be awarded. Total
expenditure not to exceed $850. See pages "F" and "F-1"
ALL DISTRICTS
Consideration of motion authorizing District No. 1 to
award contract and to approve any recommended change
orders for Job No. P2-8-3 upon receipt of the written
recommendation of the architectural consultant and
concurrence of the engineers and General Manager
ALL DISTRICTS
Consideration of Resolution No. 68-73, approving plans and
specifications for Jobs I-7-1 and P2-13 . (Plant No. 1
Bypass Facilities at Plant No. 2; and Sedimentation Basin
Effluent Facilities), and authorizing advertising for
bids to be received until 4:00 p.m., October 31, 1968.
See page "G"
ALL DISTRICTS
Consideration of mo ti.on approving Change Order No. 3
to the plans and specifications for Job No. P2-ll (Head-
works "C" at Plant No. 2), granting an extension of time
and authorizing a total addition of $4,387.00 to the contract
with J. Putnam Henck, Contractor. See page "H"
ALL DISTRICTS
Consideration of motion to receive and file certification
of the General Manager that he has checked all bills
appearing on the agenda, found them to be in order, and
that he recommends authorization for payment
ALL DISTRICTS
Consideration of roll call vote motion approving Joint
Operating Fund and Capital Outlay Revolving Fund warrant
books for signature of the Chairman of District No. 1,
and authorizing payment of claims listed on pages "A"
"B" , and "C"
ALL DISTRICTS
Other business and communications, if any
'
(21) DISTRICT 1
(22)
(23)
. (24)
Consideration of motion approving warrants, if any. See
page "D"
DISTRICT 1
Other business and communications, if any
DISTRICT 1
Consideration of motion to adjourn to 4:30 p.m., September
24th
DISTRICT 2
Consideration of Resolution No. 68-74-2, approving and
adopting plans and specifications for the Euclid Trunk
Sewer, Contract No. 2-10-9, and authorizing advertising
for bids to be opened at 4:00 p.m., October 7th. See
page "I"
-2-
•
(25) DISTRICT 2
Consideration of Resolution No. 68-75-2, authorizing
acceptance of an easement from Southern Pacific Company,
at no cost to the District, relative to construction of
Contract No. 2-10-9. See page i'J"
(26) DISTRICT 2
Consideration of motion approving warrants, if any. See
page "D"
(27) DISTRICT 2
Other business and conununications, if any
(28) DISTRICT 2
Consideration of motion to adjourn
(29) DISTRICT 3
Report of the engineers regarding damages due to failure of
manhole coatings
(30) DISTRICT 3
Consideration of motion approving warrants, if any. See
page "D"
(31) DISTRICT 3
Other business and communications, if any
(32) DISTRICT 3
(33)
Consideration of motion to adjourn
DISTRICT 5
Consideration of motion approving warrants, if any. See
page "D"
(34) DISTRICT 5
Other business and communications, if any
(35) DISTRICT 5
Consideration of motion to adjourn
(36) DISTRICT 6
Consideration of motion approving warrants, if any. See
page "E"
(37) DISTRICT 6
(38)
(39)
\,.I ( 4o)
Other business and communications, if any
DISTRICT 6
Consideration of motion to adjourn
DISTRICT 7
Consideration of motion authorizing the General Manager to
advise the developer of a tract on Smalley Road, that if he
prepays connection charges and later does not develop. the
property, the District will enter into a Master Plan Reimburse-
ment Agreement to refund any prepaid fees not applicable
DISTRICT 7
Consideration of Resolution No. 68-76-7, authorizing acceptance
of an easement, at no cost to the District, from Collins
Radio Company and Irvine Industrial Complex relative to the
Stanford Research Institute sewer. See page ~"K~"---
-3-
•
(41) DISTRICT 7
(42)
(43)
(44)
(45)
(46)
(47)
(48)
(49)
(50)
Gonsideration of Resolution No. 68-77-7, authorizing
acceptance of an easement, at no cost to ~he District,
from Tustana Homes. See page "L"
DISTRICT 7
Consideration of motio~ approving warrants, if any.
page "E"
DISTRICT 7
Other business and communications, if any
DISTRICT 7
See
Consideration of motion to adjourn to 4:30 p.m., September
24th
DISTRICT 11
Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve
request from the Executive Officer, Regional Water
Quality Control Board, requesting that the District
Board meet with the Sunset Beach Sanitary District
Board relative to the possibility of District No. 11
providing sewer service to the Sunset Beach area; and
directing the General Manager to advise the Executive
Officer of the Board's willingness to meet jointly with
the Sanitary District Board. See page "M"
DISTRICT 11
Consideration of motion approving Change O~der No. 1 to
the plans and specifications for Contract No. 11-llR-l
{Manhole Reconstruction, Phase I), granting an extension
of time of 15 days to Cook & Barletta, Inc., Contractor.
See page "N"
DISTRICT 11
Consideration of Resolution No. 68-78-11, accepting
Contract No. 11-llR-l as complete and authorizing the
filing of a Notice of Completion of Work. See page·
II Q fl
DISTRICT 11 .
Consideration of motion approving warrants, if any.
~ee page "E"
DISTRICT 11
Other business and communications, if any
DISTRICT 11
Consideration of motion to adjourn to date to be determined
-4-
g96t 'tt Jaqwa~dag
SiliN~wnooa DNI~Hoaans <INV sNor~n~os~H
WARRANT NO.
9879
9880
L. j 9881
~ 9882
9883
9884
9885
9886
9887
9888
9889
9890
9891
9892
9893
9894
9895
9896
9897
9898
9899
9900
9901
9902
9903
9904
9905
9906
...._J. 9907
9908
9909
9910
9911
9912
9913
9914
9915
9916
9917
9918
9919
9920
9921
9922
9923
9924
9925
9926
9927
9928
9929
99.30
9931
~932
9933
9934
9935
. 9936
9937
9938
JOINT OPERATING FUND WARRANTS
IN FAVOR OF
AAA Fremont Bag & Salvage Co., Burlap Bags
Acore Drilling Service, Cored Drilling .
A-1 Bearings & Abrasives, Bearings
Advance Electric Co., Motor Rewind
American Ai~ Filter Co., Filters ·
American Cryogenics, Inc., Lab & Welding Supplies
City of Anaheim, Power
The Anchor Packing Co., Gaskets, Small Hardware
Apco Supply Co., Controls
Atlas Stationers, Office Supplies
Bank of America, Coupon Coll. Exp.
Barnes & Delaney, Tires & Tuoes
Bay City Bearing Co., Bearings
Beach Fabricating Co., Metal Shop Work
Beacon Auto Parts, Truck Parts
Bell's Radiator Service, Radiator Repair
Bomar Magneto Service, Inc., Magneto Repairs
Charles Bruning Co., Drafting Supplies
Buena Park Wholesale Electric, Electric Supplies
California Water Pollution Control Assoc., Pump Ad
Challenge-Cook Bros., Wheel Loader Parts
C-L Chemical Products, Cleaning Supplies
Clow Corp., Couplings
College Lumber Co., Small Hardware
Consolidated Elect~ical Dist., Elect. Sup~lies
Costa Mesa Auto Parts, Inc., Truck Parts
Costa Mesa County Water Dist., Water
John M. Deck Co., Port. Equip. Parts, Starter
De Guelle & Son's Glass Co., Truck Repairs
Dial Hydrocrane Service, Crane Rental
Diesel Control Corp., Filters, Engine Parts
Enchanter, Inc., Ocean Sampling & Current Monitoring
Engineers Sales-Service Co., Pump Parts ·
Fischer & Porter Co., Vaporizer Parts
Flair Drafting Service., Drafting Service
Foster Sand & Gravel Co., Crane Rental
Fowler Equipment, Inc., Crane Rental
Freeway Machine & Welding Shop, Machine Shop Work
·aaines Electric Supply Co., Electric Supplies
General Telephone Co.
Gladman & Wallace, Tires & Tubes
Bob Gosche Co., Small Hardware
H & H Supply Co., Epoxy
Harlow Clocks, Clock Repair
AMOUNT
68.25
35.00
23.12
591.56
181.06
64.46
95.73
144.27
223.37
68.82
698.46
12.22
89 .18
4.75
59.97
40.00
85.34
154.83
645.48
L~6 .00
31.57
44.30
62.24
81.87
295.83
360.04
6.oo
28.21
31.50
114.oo
150.89
4,110.00
18.90
132.90
424.oo
244.oo
482.00
12.50
111.89
1,079.15
40.91
155.86
34.65
Fred A. Harper_, C .o .D. Supplies & Var:i.ous Meeting Exp.
Hennig Inc., Paint Vehicle
13.40
78.81
64.05
326.00
11.00
618.47
1,514.21
7.30
Hercules, Inc., Chemicals
·James E. Hilborn, Employee Mileage
Honeywell, Inc., Controls, Instrument Repairs
Howard Supply Co., Pipe Supplies, Small Tools
City of Huntington Beach, Water
ILG Industries, Inc., Electric Supplies
Imperial First Aj_d Supply Co., Supplies
International Business Machines, Office Supplies
International Harvester Co., Truck Parts
Johnson Service Co., Valve Mtce.
Jones Chemicals, Inc., Chlorine
Kar Products, Inc., Elect. Supplies, Hardware
Keenan Pipe & Supply Co., Pipj_ng Supplies
Kelly ·Pipe Co., Piping Supplies
-A-
121.28
18.23
33.08
82.30
62.45
11,088.00
122.06
21lt. 28
141.19
WARRANT NO.
9939
9940
9941
9942
\...,) 9943
9944
9945.
9946
9947
9948
9949
9950
9951
9952
9953
9954
9955
9956
9957
9958
9959
9960
9961
9962
9963
9964
9965
9966
9967
9968
\,wJ. 9969
9970
9971
9972
9973
9974
9975
9976
9977
9978
9979
9980
9981
9982
9983
9984
9985
9986
9987
9988
9989
9990
9991
9992
.· 9993
~999 1~·
9995
9996
9997
9998
9999
10000
IN FAVOR OF
Kleen-Line Corp., Maintenance Supplies $
Knox Indust.rial Supplies_, Hardware
Herbert H. Kyzer, Jr., Employee Mileage
Judy Lee, Employee Mileage
LBWS, Inc., Small Tools
Leupold & Stevens Instruments, Telemete~ing Supplies
L & N Uniform Supply Co., Uniform Rental
Chas. Lowe Co., Pump Parts
Mccalla Bros., Seals, Pump Parts
McGraw-Hill Publications, Technical Journal
J. M. McKinney Co., Line Clean Tools
Mahaffey Machine Co., Machine Shop Work
Metermaster, Inc., Meter Repair
Mobile Oil Corp., Grease ·
Morrison Co., Valves
The National Cash Register Co., Forms
City of Newport Beach, Water
C. Arthur Nisson, General Counsel Retainer
O. c. Supr>liers, Inc., Small Hardware
Oakite Products, Cleaning Compound
Co. of Orange, Juvenile Work Program
Ohio Tool & Engineering Co., Small Tools
Orange County Radiotelephone
Pacific Telephone Co.
Postmaster, Postage
Douglas E. Preble, Employee Mileage
Quindar Electronics, Inc., Electric Suoolies
The Register, Newspaper Subscription
Repco, Engine Block
Russell M. Scott., Sr., Employee Mileage
Santa Ana Blue Print Co., Map
E. H. Sargent & Co., I:ab Supplies
Sebastaino F. Serrantino, Employee Mileage
Sherwin-Williams Co., Paint
A. H. Shipkey, Inc., Tires & Tubes
John SiglerJ Employee Mileage & WPCF Conf. Adv.
Smith Optical Service, Safety Glasses
So. California Edison Co.
So. Califo~nia Water Co.
So. Counties Gas Co.
·southern Marine Supply, Small Hardware .
Southland Machinery Corp,, Compressor Parts
Sparkletts, Bottled Water
Speed-E-Auto Parts, Truck Parts
39 Stake & Building Supplies Co.,· Survey Supplies
Standard Oil Co., Diesel Fuel
Standard Ready-Mix Concrete, Concrete
State Comp. Fund, State Comp. Policy Premium
Sterling Electric Motors, Inc., Drive Belts
·Sully-Miller Co., Asphalt Stockpile
Surveyors Service Co., Small Tools
C. O. Thompson Petroleum Coo, Weed Oil
J. T. Thorpe, Inc., Incinerator Repairs
Tinker & Rasor Co., Test Equi9ment
F. H. Toppin Co., Vacuum Repair
Transport Clearir.gs, Freight
Union Oil Co., Gasoline
Earl Vinson Auto Parts, Tool Repair
John R. Waples R.s., Odor Consultant
Warren & Bailey Co., Small Hardware
Waukesha Engine Servicenter, Engine Parts
.western Belting & Mechanicals, Inc., Mtce. Supplie~
-n-
AMOUNT
163.10
141.00 .
21.70
19.80
565.60
12.96
722.98
140.18
88.63
14.oo
22.05
82.98
64.83
36.38
64.52
420.11
1,185.54
700.00
13.75
86.33
400.00
16.00
411.90
348.50
200.00
29.50
53.44
13.50
131.25
22.80
4.81
590.54
26.80
359.17
182.55
119.00
13.60
10, 030,!~7
3.66
703089
44.77
32.39
105.85
88.15
35.39
175.06
45.73
12,764.13
143.46
l.!-6. 26
4.48
121.69
320.00
195.30
. 15. 73
27.81
719 .51
9.50
108.50
154.57
716.28
63000
WARR.L\NT NO.
\wt
10001 I
10002
10003
10004
10005
10006
10007
IN FAVOR OF
Western Salt Co., Salt
Michael Wilson, Employee Mileage
Wilson Engine & Equipment Co., Engine Parts
TOTAL JOINT OPERATING FUND
CAPITAL OUTLAY REVOLVING FUND WARRANTS
John Carollo Engineers
Freedom Newspapers, Inc.
J. Putnam Henck
Wallace Trade Bindery Co.
TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY REVOLVING FUND
TOTAL JOI:NT OPERATING AND CORF
-c-
AMOUNT
$ 63.00
41.80
119.70
$ 60,291.07
$ 7, 3·28.02
90.01
52,214.22
92.94
$ 120,016.26
.WARRANT NO.
10008
iooo9
10010
10011
10012
10013
~. 10014
10015 .
10016
DISTRICT NO. 1
.ACCUMULATED CAPI.TAJ_, OUTLAY FUND WARRANTS
IN FAVOR OF.
City of Santa Ana
DISTRICT NO. 2
ACCUMUI, . .t\TED CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND WARRANTS
IN FAVOH OF
Aladdin Lithe & Art
Boyle Engineering
J.R. Lester Boyle and Sidney L. Lowry
Merco Construction Engineers Inc.
J. L. Scott Company
DISTRICT NO. 3
OPERATING FUND WARRANTS
IN FAVOR OF
County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles,
County
DISTRICT NO. 5
OPERATING FUi'ID WARRANTS
IN FAVOR OF
City of Newport Beach
ACCUMULATED CAPITAL OUTJ.AY FUND WARRANTS
IN FAVOR OF
Fairbanks Morse,Inc.
-D-
AMOUNT
~ 100,000.00
~ 100,000.00
$ 64.83
2,584.44
4,683.85
14R,611.20
3 ,101.00
~ 185,045.32
$ 160.00
~ 160.00
~ 460.00
$ 2,413.74
$ 2,873.74
DISTRICT NO. 7
·OPERATING FUND WARRANTS
WARRANT NO. IN FAVOR OF AMOUNT
J_QQ17 .Boyle Engineering $ 45.00
10018 Boyle and Lowry 252.00
10019 Irvine Industrial Complex 103.50
~ 400.50
FACILITIES REVOLVING FUND WARRANTS
IN FAVOR OF
10020 Boyle Engineering 966.00
10021 John M.Bowman 23.02
10022 Clarence L. Conzelman 23.02
10023 Ernst Leibacher 598.45
10024 County of Orange 28.05
10025 Richard B. Smith 23.01
~ 1,661.55
·~ 2,062.05
DISTRICT NO. 11
OPERATING FUi'ID WARRANTS
'w/ .. IN FAVOR OF
10026 Cook and Barletta, Inc. ~ 3~307.50
~ 3,307.50
-:E:-
BID ·TABULATION
·~ SHEET
Contract: ENCLOSURES -PHASE II
AND OPERATORS BUILDING
JOB NO. P2-8-3
Contractor
1. Saffell & McAdam, Inc.
Costa.Mesa, California
2. w. J. Burke Construc.tion Coo,
Anaheim, California
3. J. Putnam Henck
San Bernardino, California
4. Margate Construction, Inc.
Wilmington, California
5.
6.
7.
8.
g.
10.
--
Agenda Item #14 -F-
Inco
Date August 29, 1968
I Alto "Alf I Alt. 11 Bif
$1 2 800 $186 500
En~ineer 1 s Estimate
, '
Total Bid
$233,451 $230,451
$249,211 $248,211
$253,876 $247,448
$259,950 $251,750
' .
All Districts
'--·
-----------J 0 H N CAR 0 LL 0 ENGINEERS----------.:.-
Phoenix, Arizona Lafayelfe, California
.IOHN A. CAROLLO. P.E.
ROBERT M. BRERETON. P.E.
H. HARVKY HUNT. P.E.
HOWARD M. WAY. P.E.
ROBERTO. WILLIAMS, P.E.
DONALD R. PREISLER. P.E.
September 3, 1968
Mr. Fred A. Harper, General Manager
County Sanitation Districts
of Orange County
P. O. Box 51 75
Fountain Valley, California 92708
Ef Paso, Texas
Reply to1
Subject: Enclosures Phase. II and Operators Building
3688 M:r. DIABLO BOULEVARD
LAFAYETTE. CALIFORNIA 94549
AREA CODE 41S
Enclosed is a summary of the cost breakdown of the above
mentioned project. The cost breakdown is for Saffel and McAdam,
J. P. Henck, and John Carollo Engineers.
The breakdowns indicate that the major discrepancies
between the bids and the Engineerts Estimate are in the subcontractor
work, and most of this is in the three items (1) Cement Asbestos
Board; (2) Insulation; and, (3) Structural Steel.
The price we used for Cement Asbestos Board was given
to us by a Johns-Manville representative after he had reviewed the
Plans and Specifications. The Structural Steel. price was obtained
by using a price of 35¢ to 40¢ per pound, which was obtained from
Means Building Construction Cost Data, 1968. The Insulation price
we used was 35¢ per square foot,· which was also obtained from Means.
Comments that we noted from our meeting with Mr. Saffel
and Mr. Ross of Saffel and McAdam, Inc., and from a telephone
conversation with Mr. J. P. Henck on August 30, 1968, are as follows:
1.. Contractors are not hungry now.
· 2. There is a shortage of labor, especially carpenters.
3. Rebidding would not bring a lower price unless conditions we·re
as they were in late 1966 and early 1967. They did not expect
thes~ conditions to return in the forseeable future.
4. About half of the subcontractors in the area have gone broke
and, consequently, the remainder bid on only the normal jobs
and boost their price on the difficult jobs.
5. Time limit was no problem.
Agenda Item #14 F-1-1 All Districts
6. Could not see any way to lower the price other than elimination
of architectural frills. ·
a. Eliminate T-G Building trim -$15, 000 to $20, 000
b. Reduce architectural trim of Pflanz ... $3 1 000 to $41 000
$6,·000 to $8 1 000
7. Contractor add~d about 10% because of difficulty o~ work~ng in
tight quarters.
8. Price escalatiOn since June is about 1% overall. Lumber 30%1
but not much lumber· on this job except formwork.
9. Subcontractor that quoted insulation is the same one that is
doing Headworks C. Henck said subcontractor is losing money
on Headworks and may be trying to make it up on this job.
Henck had another price at about half the quoted price 1 but
it was withdrawn priC?r to bid time.
From the above comments, and the attached summary, it
is not apparent whether the bid is too high or the estimate too low.
The only method suggested by the Contraetor of reducing the cost
was to eliminate some of the work.
V.ery truly yours,
N CAROLLO ENGINEERS
HMW:ml
Enclosure
z
Agenda Item #14 F-1-2 All Districts
....... ·-...
ENCLOSURES PHASE II AND OPERATORS BUILDING
-.._,,), P2-8-3
SUMMARY OF COST BREAKDOWN
Saffel & McAdams Henck JCE
Total: · Alternate A $233,451 $253,876 $192,800
Alternate B 230,451 247,448 186,500
Difference 3,000 6, 428 6,~00
Prime Contractor Work $103,980 107, 005 116, 381
Subcontractor Work 129,471 146, 871 76,419
Subcontractor Breakdown:
Reinforcing Steel 7,746 7,746 (incl w/Prime)
Cement .. Asbestos Board 9, 411 9, 411 · 3, 660) Structural Ste el 43,900 43, 760 22, 793
Insulation 11, 761 11, 761 770
Steel Decking 17,587 17, 587 19, 980
Millwork and Laboratory 2,805 3, 776 1, 780
Sheet Metal and Heating 5, 725 5, 725 5, 900
Plumbing 2,500 2, 500 C__~zs Remove Pipe 3,000 14,.079
Electrical 3, 920 5, 130 5,057
Roofing 4,732 7~ 190 4,705
. ·'-""· Plastering and Drywall 1,926 610 350
aiazing 5,800 7,600 1,444
Torginal and Tile 1, 025 1, 717 1, 900 ..
Paint 4,000 4, 875· 480
Special Doors {inclo hardware) 2,054 2,054 2,820
Masonry 934 l,, 000 1, 1 70
Acoustical Surface 295 535
Toilet Partition 350 350 350
Agenda Item #14 F-1-3 All Districts
~-
"RESOLUTION NO. 68-73
APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR PLANT
NO. 1 BYPASS-FACILITIES AT PLANT NO. 2 JOB I-7-1
SEDIMENTATION BASIN EFFLUENT FACILITIES JOB
P2-13-l
A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF
COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, .7,
AND 11, OF ORANGE COUNTY,· CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR PLANT NO. 1 BYPASS
FACILI~IES AT PLANT NO. 2 JOB I-7-1, SEDIMENTATION
·BASIN EFFLUENT FACILITIES JOB P2-13-l
The Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts
Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 11, of Orange County·, California,
DO HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER:
Section 1. That the detailed plans, specifications and
contract documents this day submitted to the Boards of Directors
by John Carollo Engineers, Districts' Engineers, for construction
of PLANT NO. 1 BYPASS FACILITIES AT PLANT NO. 2 JOB I-7-1, SEDI:MENTATION
BASIN EFFLUENT FACILITIES JOB P2-13, are hereby approved and adopted;
and,
Section 2. That the Secretary be authorized and directed
to advertise for bids for said work pursuant to the provisions of
the Health and Safety Code of the State of California; and,
Section 3. That said bids will be received until 4:00 p.m.
October 31, 1968, at which time said bids will be publicly
opened and read; and,
Section 4. That the Secretary of the Boards and the
Districts' Engineer be authorized to open said bids on behalf of the
.
Board of Directors.
Agenda Item #16 · -G-All Districts
"'-'1·
COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY
P. O. BOX 5175 -10844 Ellis Avenue
-Fountain -Valley, -California -92708 .
.. CHANGE ORDER
C.O. NO. --------
CONTRACTOR: J. Putnam Henck DATE: Sept. 11, 1968
JOB: Headworks "c" at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-ll
Amourit of this change order (ADD) (".l:V~
In accordance with contract provisions, the following changes in the
contract and/or contract work are hereby authorized and as compensation
therefor, the following additions to or deductions from the contract price
are hereby approved.
REFERENCE: Contractor's letter received August 30, 1968,·Districts'
.Memoranda dated August 9.and August 30, 1968, Contract
·Drawings Y-5A(Rev. 1), M-lOA(Rev. 1), M-llA(Rev. 1),
M-14A(Rev. 1) and M-35A(Rev. 1) ·
1. Revise the engine cooling system pipe as shown on
Drawings M-lOA(Rev. 1), M-llA(Rev. 1), M-14A{Rev. 1)
and M-35A(Rev. 1)
(NOTE: The following item is specifically to facilitate
the work for Job No. I-7-1, Plant No. 1 Bypass)
2. Install a 42-inch V.C.P. pipe and connect.to
Headworks "c" as indicated on Sheet Y-5A(Rev. 1)
$ 717.00
TOTAL CHANGE ORDER ADD
31670.00
$4,387.00
* * * * * * * * * * *
EXTENSION OF TIME:· An extension of time of 15 calendar days to toe
Contract period for the above items of work is
hereby granted.
Original Contract Price $ 2, 495, 961. 00
Prev. Auth. Changes ADD $ 5,016.88
This Change (ADD)~ $ 4,387 .oo
Amended Contract Price $ 2,505,364. 88
Board authorization date: Approved:
~ Sep~·. 11, 1968 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of
Orange County, California
By /s/ Paul G. Brown
Chief Engineer
J. PUTNAM HEijCK
Agenda Item #17 -H-All Districts
RESOLUTION NO. 68-74-2
APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR
EUCLID TRUNK SEWER, CONTRACT NO. 2-10-9
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 2, OF ORANGE
COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS FOR EUCLID TRUNK SEWER,
CONTRACT NO. 2-10-9
The Board of Directors of County Sanitation District
No. 2, of Orange County; California,
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER:
Section 1. That the detailed plans, specifications and
contract documents this day submitted to the Board of Directors
by Boyle Engineering, District's engineers, for construction of
EUCLID TRUNK SEWER, CONTRACT NO. 2-10-9, are hereby approved and
adopted; and,
Section 2. That the Secretary be authorized and directed
to advertise for bids for said work pursuant to the provisions of
the Hea~th and Safety Code of the State of California; and,
Section 3. That said bids will be. received until
4:00 p.m., October 7, 1968, at which time said bids will be publicly
opened and r~ad; and,
Section 4. That the Secretary ·or the Board and the
District's Engineersbe authorized to open said bids on behalf of
the Board of Directors.
Agenda Item #24 -I-District 2
. .....;
RESOLUTION NO. 68-75-2
APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH SOUTHERN PACIFIC COMPANY
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY
SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 2, OF ORANGE COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION
OF AN EASEMENT AGREEMENT WITH SOUTHERN PACIFIC
COMPANY
The Board of Directors 9f County Sanitation District
No. 2, of Orange County, California,
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER:
Section 1. That the certain agreement, dated September
11, 1968, wherein SOUTHERN PACIFIC COMPANY, a corporation of the
State of Delaware grants to COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 2
. permission to construct and maintain a 33" sewer line beneath
the Company's tracks and property near West Anaheim -Stanton,
is hereby approved; and,
Section 2. That the Chairman and Secretary of the
Board of Directors are hereby_ authorized and directed to execute
said agreement on behalf of the District.in form acceptable
to the General Counsel.
Agenda Item #25 -J-District 2
RESOLUTION NO. 68-76-7
AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF EASEMENT
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY
SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 7, OF ORANGE COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF EASEMENT
FROM COLLINS RADIO COMPANY AND IRVINE INDUSTRIAL
COMPLEX
The Board of Directors of County Sanitation District
No. 7, of Orange County, California,
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER:
Section 1. That the certain Grant of Easement, dated
August 19, 1968, ~herein COLLINS RADIO COMPANY, an Iowa Corporation
and IRVINE INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX, a California Corporation, grant
to County Sanitation District No. 7 a permanent easement for
sewer purposes situated in the County of Orange, State of
California, is hereby approved and accepted; and,
Section 2. That the real property over which said
easement is granted is more particularly described as follows:
All that strip of land 15 feet wide in the
County of Orange, State of California, the
centerline of which is described as follows:
Beginning at a point in the Northwesterly line
of Parcel 1 as shown on that certain Parcel Map
recorded April 6, 1966 in Book 2, Page 30 of :
Parcel Maps in the Office of the County Recorder
of said Orange County; distant N 40° -38 1 -26"
E 570.09 feet from the Northwest corner therof;
thence N 47° 58 1 38'~ W 642 .11 feet to the
Easterly line of MacArthur Boulevard, 110 feet
wide, as described in a Deed recorded in Book
1047, Page 557, Official Records of said Orange
County.
Section 3. That said Grant of Easement is accepted
at no cost to the District; and,
Section 4. That the Secretary of the Board of Directors
be authorized and directed to record said Grant of Easement in
l..._J the Official Records of Orange County, California.
Agenda Item #40 -K-District 7
RESOLUTION NO. 68-77-7
AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF EASEMENT
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD.OF DIRECTORS. OF COUNTY
SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 7, OF ORANGE COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF EASEMENT
FROM TUSTANA HOMES, A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
The Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.
7, of Orange County, California,
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER:
Section 1. That the certain Grant of Easement, dated
August 29, 1968, wherein TUSTANA HOMES, a limited partnership,
grants to County Sanitation District No. 7 a permanent easement for
sewer purposes in connection with Parcels 1 and 2 of Tract No. 5265,
is hereby approved and adcepted; and,
Section 2. That the real property over which said easement
is granted is more particularly described as follows:
Parcel 1.
Westerly 10.00 feet of the Easterly 20.00 feet of
Lot 16, Tract No. 5265 as shown on a map thereof
recorded in Book 238, pages 30 & 31, Miscellaneous
Maps, Records of Orange County, California
Parcel 2.
The Southerly 10. 00 feet of Lots 7 and 14, -Tract
No. 5265 as shown on a map thereof recorded .in Book
238, pages 30 & 31, Miscellaneous Maps, Records of
Orange County, California.
Section 3. That said Grant of Easement is accepted at
no cost to the District; and,
Section 4. That the Secretary of the Board of Directors
be authorized and directed to record said Grant of Easement in the
Official Records of Orange County, California.
Agenda Item #41 · -L-District 7
STATE Of CALIFORNIA-RE.SOURCES AGENC't
~SANTA ANA RIVER BASIN REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL. BOARD
6848 MAGNOLIA AVENUE, SUITE U, RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92506
THOMAS V. CHANDLER
LAWRENCE E. COFFEY
ROBERT A. DAILY
WILLIAM H. McGURTY
DONALD F. MITCHELL
EVERETT C. ROSS
ALBERT E. SCHROEDER .
RICHARD A. BUEERMANN
fxecuflve Officer
September s. 1968
Board of Directors, Sunset Beach Sanitary District
Attention: Mr. Richard L. Harrison, District Supe1"intenclent
Boa1"Cl of Directors, Orange County Sanitation D5.strict No. 11
Attention: Mr. Fred Harper, General Manager
City of Huntington Beach
Attention: Mr. Doyle Hiller, City Manager
RONALD REAGAN, Governor
This office has received complaints from residents of Huntington
Harbour. of odors allegedly a1"ising from the Sunset B~ach Sanitary
District seHage treatment plant operations. The intensity of the
complaints is great and the complainants are quite concerned about
the matter.
We understand that the sanitary district, the City of Huntington Beach,
and Orang·:= County Snnitation D5.strict No. 11 have been negotiating for
several years towards tha end of by-passing and abandoning th~ Sunset
Beach tl'eatn~nt plant with sewage being handled by the City, District
No. 11 and the joint County Sanitation Districts. The staff of this
board concurs in this ultimate· goal. In view of the intensi-ty of the
residential development in close proximity to the set-mge t1"'eatrrent
plant on \'larncr Avenue, we b~lieva this plant should be eii:i1er
modernized or abandoned. Hod~rnization may be cost:ly and does not
appear at first glance to be the best solution for the long term.
Since complaints have arisen of odors that apparently orig·rn.a·te 1 at
least in part:, from the ti"'eatJ~:2nt plant operation, \·1e feel that wa
should assist in any way we can to h~!lp 1"'2solve the problem.
The first step ,.,ould be for this board to call th3 two clistr·ict boards
and the City staff together f 01"' a full discussion of the mn:i:ter to as-
certain the a1"'cas of ag1"'~en~nt and disagrecm3nt and to sce1~ early
agreement on consolidation.
Agenda 'Item #45 M-1 District 11
'..._)
~
'.._.I
Sunset Beach Sanitary Dist.
Orange County San. Dist. No. 11.
City of Hunting.ton Beach -2-9-5-68
•
Please advise us prior to September 16 of your willingness to parti-
cipate in such a discussion with our staff and of the dates you could
meet. We will then arrange an acceptable meeting date.
Your early reply will be very much appreciated as we view this as an
urgent matter. ,
~1 a&u-ufa-<~
RICHARD A. BUEERHANN
Executive Officer
'
Agenda Item #45 M-2
·.
District 11
COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY
· P. o. BOX 5175 -10844 Ellis Avenue
___ Fountain Valley, California 92708
CHANGE ORDER
C .O. NO. 1
--~~~~----~---
Cook & Barletta, Inc. ~ATE: Sept. 11, 1968
JOB: Manhole Reconstruction, Phase. I, Contract No. 11-llR-l
Amourit o_f this change order (ADD) {DEDUCT) $ none ----
In accordance with contract provisions, the :following changes in the
contract and/or contract work are hereby authorized and as compensation
therefor, the following additions to or deductions :from the contract price
are hereby approved.
EXTENSION OF TIME
Acts o:f Other Agencies
Delay in r.eceipt of construction permit from State
Division of Highways
REFERENCE: Engineer's letter dated Sept. 5, 1968
* * * * * * * * * * * *
Original specified completion date:
Completion date with this extension
of time -15 calendar days
Actual completion date
August 21, 1968
September 5, 1968
September 5, 1968
15
Original Contract Price $ 5,250.00
Board authorization date:
\.._/ Sept. 11, 1968
Agenda Item #46
Prev. Auth. Changes $ none
This Change (ADD) {DEDUCT) $ none
Amended Contract Price $ 5,250.00
-N-
Approved:
·coUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of
Orange County, California
By /s/ Paul G. Brown
Chief Engineer
COOK & BARLETTA, INC.
District 11
RESOLUTION NO. 68-78-11
ACCEPTING CONTRACT FOR MANHOLE RECONSTRUCTION,
PHASE I, CONTRACT NO. 11-llR-l AS COMPLETE
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 11·, OF ORANGE·
COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING CONTRACT FOR
MANHOLE RECONSTRUCTION, PHASE I, CONTRACT
NO. 11-llR-l AS COMPLETE
The Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.
11, of Orange County, California,
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER:
Section 1. That the contractor, Cook and Barletta, Inc.,
has completed the construction in accordance with the terms of
the contract for the MANHOLE RECONSTRUCTION, PHASE I, CONTRACT
NO. 11-llR-l, on the 5th day of September, 1968; and,
Section 2. That by lett~r, Lowry and Associates,
District's engineers, have recommended acceptance of said work
~. as having been completed in accordance with the terms of the
contract; and,
Section 3. That the Chief Engineer of the District has
concurred in said engineers' recommendation, which said recom-
mendation is hereby received and ordered filed; and,
Section 4. That the MANHOLE RECONSTRUCTION, PHASE I,
CONTRACT NO. 11-llR-l, is hereby accepted as completed in
accordance with the terms of the contract therefor, dated the
23rd aay of May, 1968; and,
Section 5. That the Chairman of· the District is hereby
authorized and directed to execute a Notice of Completion of
Work therefor.
Agenda Item #47 -0-·nis tric t 11
_9
COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS
OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P.a. sax 5175, FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, 92708
Gentlemen:
August 29, 1968
NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING
DISTRICT NO. 5
Thursday, 4:00 p.m., September 5, 1968
Council Chambers
Newport Beach City Hall
Newport Beach, California
TELEPHONES:
AREA CODE 714
540-2910
962-2411
I am calling a special meeting of the Board of Directors of
County Sanitation District No. 5 at the above hour and date.
The purpose of this meeting is to consider the following
items:
1.
2.
3.
Consideration of Staff Report on Re-Appraisal
of the District's Current Connection-Charge
Schedule. See page "A"
Progress report on the arrangements authorized by
the Board on April 12th, for the construction of
the Big Canyon Sewer. See pages "B" and "C"
Consideration of Written Interim Report of the
Engineer regarding increasing the capacity of
the Jamboree ~umping Station. (Report will be
included in the agenda at the meeting)
/s/ Lindsley Parsons
Chairman
·COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS.
OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
10844 ELLIS AVENUE, P.O. BOX 5175, FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIF"ORNIA, 92708
Board of Directors
County Sanitation District No. 5
.of Orange County
August 29, 1968 -
Subject: Report on Re-Appraisal of District's
9urrent Connection ~harge Schedule
TELEPHONES:
AREA CODE 714
540-2910
962-2411
The Directors will recall that at the April 11, 1968 adjourned
Board meeting, the staff was instructed to "make a complete study of
the financing required to construct facilities as· outlined by the
District's Engineer and recommend a connection charge schedule that
_will enable the District to finance its capital improvements without
. increasing the ad valorem tax rate". ,. .
Statement of Problem and Background Information
The Board's request for this report was-caused primarily by an
inquiry from the Irvine Company regarding the financing of three
additional trunk sewers (Big Canyon Trunk, Los Trances Trunk and Buck
Gully Trunk) which were not included in the 1964 ultimate facilities
plan. After consideration of the matter, the Board approved prepa-
ration of an ~greement with the Company whereby the Company will
construct the Big Canyon Sewer and be reimbursed by the District from
funds collected for connection charges within the area tributary to
the sewer.
Th~ 1964 engineering report by Donald c. Simpson, which led to
the adoption of the Ultimate Facilities Plan proposed in the report, .·.
listed total ultimate needed facilities in the District and estimated
the District No. 5 share of their cost at $2,366,ooo (District No. 6
would contribute a minor amount). ·
Of these projects, all of those listed to be 6onst~ucted before
1970 have been completed at a total cost of $829,000. Of this sum,.
$400,000 has been borrowed from the Irvine· Company, $340,8o~·derived
A-1
Board of Dir~c~ors
from District's tax revenue and $88,200 from District's connection
charges. Shortly after Mr. Simpson's, report was submitted, a financing
report and plan. by Bartle Wells a_nd Associates was submitted and
approved. This plan contemplated financing the entire $2,366,000 plan
from connection charges at $120 per dwelling unit. An escalation of
this charge, by $5 per year, was also recommended but not used in the
financing projections. Since the 1964 Simpson report was adopted,
. two modifications have been made which have increased the total project
costs. In addition, the cost of the portion of the work now completed
is now known. From these two factors we can arrive at a reasonable
estimate that the total remaining project costs to ultimate saturation,
including the above-described three new sewers, will be slightly more
·.than $3 million. . · ·
In addition to connection charges, the Bartle Wells report also
recommended an initial annexation fee of $250 per acre for outside
areas desiring to use the District's system. However, funds raised
·.·in this manner were reco~~ended to be applied to treatment ·plant
. expansion.
"...,_) Financing Projection~
Ordinance No. 502 (July, 1965) of the District establishes the
~bove connection charges. At the time of adoption of the Ordinance,
considerable study was given to the recommendation of Bartle Wells
that the charge be escalated on a regular ba~is. However, this
excalation plan was not incorporated in the Ordinance.
The staff estimates, as matters now stand, that the $3 million
remaining project cost plus the $1~00,000 obligation to the Irvine
Company will exceed by $1,280,000 the remaining amount to be ultimately
collect~d from the present connection fees.
The staff has also calculated that to finance all facilities
by connection charges, as contemplated, would require that the
connection charge be increased to an average of $200 each over the
next 20 years. This calculation is based on using $150,000 of ad
valorem tax funds now available, plus $100,000 available from the
Facilities Revolving Fund in ~hich connection charges are deposited.
Alternate Finand.n~
As pointed out at the April 11 m~eting the District, on the
assumption that other standard financing methods such as a bond issue
A-2
'....,,) .
.. --· . -;-_
Board of Directors
are eliminated from consideration, has the choice of either (1)
Increasing the connection charges to an average of $200 over the next
20 years (2) Raising the additional $1,280,000 required by ad valorem
tax· over the period with the connection charge remaining at the present
figure or (3) A combination of a lesser increase in the connection
charge and some ad valorem tax financing.
If Alternate No. 2 is selected, it is extimated that, on the
basis of an annual increase of assessed valuations of 7%, the average
ad valorem tax necessary to be levied to provide the sum of $1,280,000
in 20 years will be approximately 2.li. It is impossible to state at
this time whether this rate will result in an over-all increase in
: the District's tax rate, which is 27. 0¢ for 1968-69. Hm·Jever, it
appears probable that such an increase will not be necessary since
the present and past District budgets have included funds from
general taxation for capital outlay projects.
. If Alternate No. 3 is selected, the tax rate for capital outlay
. will, or course, be less than the estimated 2. lt under .Alternate No. 2,
depending upon what increase in connection charges is finally
established.
4.~;r?I~
· General Manager
A-3
... ..
"'
S H U I ·R M A N -S I M P S 0 N.
consulting civil engineers
URBANUS SQUARE
MacARTHUR BLVD. AT FORD ROAD
CORONA DEL MAR, CALIFORNIA 92625
(714) 644-0563
A~gust 20, 1968
County Sanitation District No. 5
10844 Ellis Avenue
Fountain Valley, California
Attention: Mr. Fred A. Harper, General Man~ger
We have reviewed the ·preliminary plans for the Big
Canyon trunk sewer, and have resolved most of the technical questions
with the design engineer. However, a number of other items have been
discussed that are outside the ·technical engineering area which I
feel should be resolved prior to the start· of construction. The.se
items are as follows:
1. The trunk will not have capacity to serve
the portion of District 5 lying northerly of
proposed Ford Road and westerly of MacArthur
Boulevard. Previous discussions have indicated
that this area will be either de-annexed from
District No. 5 or served by Irvine Ranch Water
District under contract with District No. 5.
Perhaps it would be well to have an assurance
from the Irvine Company that this area will not
be connected to the B~g Canyon trunk.
2. How will the costs of the sewer construction
to be included in the reimbursement agreement be
determined? I understand that the developer
either has obtained or is in the process of
obtaining bids for the work. Will this be
satisfa6tory, or will the District require
formal type of bid advertising and award? Will
the reimbursable cost of the construction include
e~gineeri~g des~gn, plan check, and inspection?
. 3. Under what conditions can the sewer be
constructed prior to granti~g of the necessary
easements and execution of a reimbursement
~greement.
4. In the future, when the adjacent areas are
developed, it appears that grading will be
required over the sewer. It might be well to
provide for this future.gradi~g in ·the grant of
easement.
B -1 -
..
. ;-
9;
~ ..
. ..
5. The construction of an access road will
result in cut slopes outside the proposed
15-foo.t. easement. Provisions for the
maintenance of these slopes and the clearing
of possible slide material from the access·
road should be included in the grant of
easement.
6. It will undoubtedly take some time to
formalize the reimburs·ew,ent agreement and to
grant all the necessary easem.ents. Until
·these steps are completed, I assume the sewer
cannot be accepted by the District and,
therefore, Bren's Tract would be served on an
interim basis by, in effect, a private sewer.
All parties involved should be aware of this
condition since this m~ght not be acceptable.
·•
Please let me know if you want my help in resolvi~g or
clarifyi~g any of the above items.
DCS:c
cc-J.Panchal,
Irvine Co.
cc-M.Anderson,
Raub,Bein,Frost
B -2 -
SHUIRMAN-SIMPSON
.d-nd/a/~
Donald c. Simpson
. _,
-,. THE IRVINE. CO:NIPANY IRVINE,CALl~ORNIA 92664
71<il•!i41A-0120
August 22, 1968
Orange County Sanitation District No. 5
10844 Ellis Avenue
Fountain Valley, California
Attention Mr.· Fred Harper, General Manager
Dear Mr. Harper:
Reference is made to the letter dated August 20, 1968 from Don
Simpson on the review of preliminary plans for the Big Canyon
trunk sewer to serve the Bren development westerly of new MacArthur
1~ Boulevard and southerly of proposed Ford Road extension.
This letter is written to assure District No. 5 that The Irvine
Company does not intend to serve the area northerly of the proposed
Ford Road extension into the proposed Big Canyon trunk sewer. It
is our understanding that this area will be deannexed from District
.No. 5 as soon as arrangements are made for» sewer service by the
·Irvine Ranch Water District. ·
Please note that all other items discussed by ~~. Simpson in the
subject letter will be coor.dinated with you by David Kaylor of The
Irvine Company. If .you require any furth~r assistance on this
matter, please feel free to contact me.
JP/pmc
Very truly yours,
l ,·j ~ 4 / // / ~<: 2:(.4?-tr~-l~.
ay Panchal
Senior Engineer
cc: Donald Simpson -Sanitation District No. 5
M. Anderson -Raub, Bein and Frost
W. Eppinger -Irvine Ranch Water Distri~t
navid A. Knylor :
-C-
,.
II
BO ARDS OF DIRECTORS
County Sanit at ion Districts
of Ora nge Cou nty , Californ ia
DISTRICT No . 5
P. 0 . Box 5175
10844 Ellis Avenue
Foun ta in Val ley, Cal if., 92708
AGENDA
(1) Roll Call
Special Meeting
Se ptember 5~ 1968 -4 :00 p .m.
(2 ) Appointment of Chairman pro tern , i f necessary
(3 ) Report of the General Manager
(4) Report of the General Counsel
(5 ) Consideration of Staff Report on Re -Appraisal of the
Di strict's Current Connectio n -Charge Schedule . See
page "A"
(6 ) Progress report on the arrangements authorized by the
Boa r d on April 12th , f or the construction of the Big
Canyon Sewer . See pages "B" and "C"
(7) Con sideration of Written Interim Report of the Engineer
regarding increasing the capacity of the J amboree
Pumping Station . See page 11 D11
(8 ) Consideration of motion to adjourn
COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS
OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
TELEPHONES:
AREA CODE 714
540-2910
962-2411
i 10944 ELLIS AVENUE, P.O. BOX 5175, FOUNTAIN VALl.EY, CALIFORNIA, 92708
I
' ! \._I
I
I'
Board of Directors
County Sanitation District No. 5
.of Orange County
August 29, 1968 ·
Subject: Report on Re-Appraisal of District's
9urrent Connection ~harge Schedule
The Directors will recall that at the April 11, 1968 adjourned
Board meeting, the staff was instructed to "make a complete study of
the financing required to construct facilities as· outlined by the
District's Engineer and recommend a connection charge schedule that
.will enable the District to finance its capital improvements without
inereasing the ad valorem tax rate".
Statement of Problem and Background Information
The Board's request for this report was caused primarily by an
inquiry from the Irvine Company regarding the financing of three
additional trunk sewers (Big Canyon Trunk, Los Trances Trunk and Buck
Gully Trunk) which were not included in the 1964 ultimate facilities
plan. After consideration of the matter, the Board approved prepa-
ration of· an agreement with the Company whereby the Company will
construct the Big Canyon Sewer and be reimbursed by the District from
funds collected for connection charges within the area tributary to
the sewer.
The 1964 engineering report by Donald c. Simpson, which led to
the adoption of the Ultimate Facilities Plan proposed in the report, ·.
listed total ultimate needed facilities in the District and estimated·
the District No. 5 share of their cost at $2,366,000 (District No. 6
would contribute a minor amount). · ·
Of these projects, all of those listed to be constructed before
1970 have been completed at a total cost of $829,000. Of this sum,.
$400,000 has been borrowed from the Irvine Company, $340,8oo·aerived
A-1
! •
. 1
Board of Dir~c~ors
\.,.I from District's tax revenue and $88,200 from District's connection
charges. Shortly after Mr. Simpson's report was submitted, a financing
report and plan.by Bartle Wells and Associates was submitted and·
approved. This plan contem~lated financing the entire $2,366,000 plan
from connection charges at $120 per dwelling unit. An escalation of
this charge, by $5 per year, was also recommended but not used in the
financing projections. Since the 1964 Simpson report was adopted,
. two modifications have been made which have increased the total project
co·sts. In addition, the cost of the portion of the work now completed
is now known. From these two factors we can arrive at a r~asonable
estimate that the total remaining project costs to ultimate saturation,
including the above-described three new sewers, will be slightly more
·than $3 million. ·
In addition to connection charges, the Bartle Wells report also
recommended an initial annexation fee of $250 per acre for outside
areas desiring to use the District's system. However, funds raised
. in this manner were recommended to be applied to treatment plant
.expansion.
Financing Projection~
Ordinance No. 502 (July, 1965) of the District establishes the
'bove connection charges. At the time of adoption of the Ordinance,
considerable study was given to the recommendation of Bartle Wells
that the charge be escalated on a regular basis. However, this
excalation plan was not incorporated in the Ordinance.
The staff estimates, as matters now stand, that the $3 million
remaining project cost plus the $400,000 obligation to the Irvine
Company will exceed by $1,280,000 the remaining amount to be ultimately
collected from the present connection fees.
The staff has also calculated that to finance all facilities ·
by connection charges, as contemplated, would require that the
connection charge be increased.to an average of $200 each over the
next 20 years. This calculation is based on using $150,000 of ad
valorem tax funds now available, plus $100,000 available from the
Facilities Revolving Fund in which connection charges are deposited.
Alternate Financin~
As pointed out at the April 11 m~eting the District, on the
assumption that other standard financing methods such as a bond issue
A-2
\._) ..
-....,,,;
·~
Board of Directors
are eliminated from consideration, has the choice of either (1)
Increasing the connection charges to an average of $200 over the next
20 years (2) Raising the additional $1,280,000 required by ad valorem
tax-over the period with the connection charge remaining at the present
figure or (3) A combination of a lesser increase in the connection
charge and some ad valorem tax financing.
If Alternate No. 2 is selected, it is extimated that, on the
basis of an annual increase of assessed valuations of 7%, the average
ad valorem tax necessary to be levied to provide the sum of $1,280,000
in 20 years will be approximately 2.li. It is impossible to state at
this time whether this rate will result in an over-all increase in
·the District's tax rate, which is 27 .0¢ for 1968-69. Ho~Jever, it
appears probable that such an increase will not be necessary since
the present and past District budgets have included funds from
general taxation for capital outlay projects.
If Alternate No. 3 is ·selected, the tax rate for capital outlay
. will, of course, be less than the estimated 2.1¢ under Alternate No. 2,
depending upon what increase in connection charges is finally
established.
4.~~r?/av
General.Manager
A-3
..... . .. .: .
SHU I-RM AN SIMPSON
consulting civil engineers
URBANUS SQUARE
MacARTHUR BLVD. AT FORD ROAD
CORONA DEL MAR, CALIFORNIA 92625
(714) 644-0563
A~gust 20, 1968
County Sanitation District No. 5
10844 Ellis Avenue
Fountain Valley, California
Attention: Mr. Fred A. Harper, General Man~g~r
We have reviewed the preliminary plans for the Big
Canyon trunk sewer, and have resolved most of the technical questions
with the design engineer. However, a number of other items have been
discussed that are outside the ·technical engineering area which I
feel should be resolved prior to the start· of construction. These
items are as follows:
1. The trunk will not have capacity to serve
the portion of District 5 lying northerly of
proposed Ford Road and westerly of MacArthur
Boulevard. Previous discussions have indicated
that this area will be either de-annexed from
Di.strict No. 5 or served by Irvine Ranch Water
District under contract with District No. 5.
Perhaps it would be well to have an assurance
from the Irvine Company that this area will not
be connected to the B~g Canyon trunk.
2. How will the costs of the sewer construction
to be included in the reimbursement agreement be
determined? I understand that the developer
either has obtained or is in the process of
obtaining bids for the work. Will this be
satisfactory, or will the District require
formal type of bid advertising and award? Will
the reimbursable cost of the· construction include
e~gineeri~g des~gn, plan check, and inspection?
. 3. Under what conditions can the sewer be
constructed prior to granting of the necessary
easements and execution of a reimbursement
~greement.
4. In the future, when the adjacent areas are
developed, it appears that grading will be
required over the sewer. It rn~ght·be well to
provide for this future gradi~g in ·the grant of
easement.
B -1 -
\...,) .
5. The construction of an access road will
result in cut slopes outside the proposed
15-foot easement. Provisions for the
maintenance of these slopes and the clearing
of possible slide material from the access·
road should be included in the grant of
easement.
6. It will undoubtedly take some time to
formalize the reimburs·ement agreement and to
grant all the necessary easernents. Until
"these steps are completed, I assume the sewer
cannot be ·accepted by the District and,
therefore, Bren's Tract would be served on an
interim basis by, in effect, a private sewer.
All parties involved should be aware of this
condition since this m~ght not be acceptable.
...
Please let me know if you want my help in resolvi~g or
clarifyi~g any of the.above items.
DCS:c
cc-J.Panchal,
Irvine Co.
cc-M.Anderson,
Raub,Bein,Frost
B-2 -
SHUIRMAN-SIMPSON
.d-n~ai~
Donald c. Simpson
•
THE IRVINE. COMPANY IRVINE. CALl,.ORNIA 921564
71•·5~.4-0120
August 22, 1968
Orange County Sanitation District No. 5
10844 Ellis Avenue
Fountain Valley, California
Att~ntion Mr. Fred Harper, General Manager
Dea.r Mr. Harper:
Reference is made to the letter dated August 20, 1968 from Don
Simpson on the review of preliminary plans for the Big Canyon
trunk sewer to serve the Bren development westerly of new MacArthur
Boulevard and southerly of proposed Ford Road extension.
This letter is written to assure District No. 5 that The Irvine
Company does not· intend to serve the area northerly of the proposed
Ford Road extension into the proposed Big Canyon trunk sewer. It
is our understanding that this area will be deannexed from District
.No. 5 as soon as arrangements are made for-sewer service by the
·Irvine Ranch Water District. ·
Please note that all other items discussed by ~~. Simpson in the
subject letter will be coordinated with you by David Kaylor of The
Irvine Company. If you require any further assistance on this
matter, please feel free to contact me.
JP/pmc
Very truly yours,
.,··i . A / // / ~-<-: 2~ H'--tr~..?~
ay Panchal
Senior Engineer
cc: Donald ·Simpson -Sanitation District No. ·5
M. Anderson -Raub, Bein and Frost
W. Eppinger -Irvine Ranch Water District
David A. Kaylor
-C-
f
\,,.) ..
SHUIRMAN -SIMPSON
consulting civil engineers
URBANUS SQUARE
MacARTHUR BLVD. AT FORD ROAD
CORONA DEL MAR, CALIFORNIA 92625
(714) 6«.0563
A~gust 30, 1968
Fred A. Harper, General Manager
County Sanitation District No. 5
10844 Ellis Avenue
Fountain Valley, California
In accordance with the District's previous
authorization, we have proceeded with a Study of the
Jamboree Pumping Station. The purpose of the Study
is to determine whether any improvements in the
Station will be required in order to handle the
expected flows for the next 5 years.
. Although the Study has not been completed,
the projected flows indicate that the capacity of the
Station must be increased within the next year.
The improvement required will consist of new
equipment. Major structural changes will not be
required. It is expected that the new equipment will
provide sufficient capacity to meet the projected needs
of 1973. After that date, it may be necessary to
construct an entirely new Station. The cost of the
interim equipment improvements will probably not exceed
$20,000.
The Study should be completed and delivered
within the next 30 days.
SHUIRMAN-SIMPSON
4-~1~~~-Donald c. Simpson
DCS:c
-D-
August 8, 1968
TO: MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION
DISTRICT NO. 7
RE: Special Meeting -4:30 p.m., Monday, August 12, 1968
10844 Ellis Avenue, Fountain Valley,
California
Gentlemen:
I am calling a special meeting of the District No. 7
Board of Directors at the above hour and date.
The purpose of this meeting is to reconsider the actions
taken by the Board on July 10th relative to the proposed
annexation of Tract No. 6628 to the District, and to further
consider the communication from Toups Engineering, Inco,
dated July 19, 1968, concerning this proposed annexationo
The Board will also consider the Report on the District's
Annexation-Fee Policy and Procedures, submitted by Boyle
Engineering, dated July 25, 19680
/s/ Clifton C. Miller
Chairman
-Excerpt from minutes -7-10-68
DISTRICT 7
Report of the engineers on
the effect of proposed annexa-
tions on the District's sewera e
s stem Tract 2 20 acres·
Ludlow, less than 5.0 acres)
Mr. Conrad Hohener of Boyle
Engineering submitted a
written evaluation report
relative to the effect of
three proposed annexations
on the District's sewerage
system. Mr. Hohener stated
that the small volume of
waste water to be discharged from the proposed annexations
(totaling less than 30 acres) would not have a measurable
detrimental effect on the District's trunk sewer system
capacity; however, Mr. Hohener cautioned that petitions
for sizeable annexations should be discouraged as the
present trunk sewer facilities were not designed to serve
large areas outside the District.
Following a lengthy discussion concerning the proposed
annexations and the District's limited ability to continue
to annex additional areas due to the District's present trunk
sewer capacity, the following actions were taken:
A. Annexation of Tract No. 6628 (20 acres)
Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the
annexation be approved in principle, subject to
the following conditions:
1. Payment to the District of annexation fees
in the amount of $250 per acre
2. That the area be annexed to the 7th Sewer
Mainte.nance District
3. That the area be withdrawn from the Irvine
Ranch Water District, because it appears
· that the Water District will not provide
water or sewerage facilities to the area,
as recommended by the District's engineers
B. O'Sullivan Annexation (3.66 acres)
Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the
annexation be approved in principle, subject to
the following conditions:
1. Payment to the District of annexation fees
in the amount of $250 per acre
2. That the area be annexed to the 70th Sewer
Maintenance District
-13-(over)
7-10-68
C. Ludlow Annexation (Less than 5.0 acres)
Moved, seconded and duly carried: That the
annexation be approved in principle, subject to
the following conditions:
1. Payment to the District of annexation fees
in the amount of $250 per acre
2. That the area be annexed to the 7th Sewer
Maintenance District
D. Moved 2 seconded and duly carried:
That additional annexations to the District be
discouraged until such time as sufficient hydraulic
capacity is peTmanerttly available to accept the additional
flow generated from· areas· outside the Di'strict; and,
FURTHER MOVED: That the staff be directed to consult
with the Board of Directors prior to making any tentative
commitments relative to annexations to the District.
-14-
TOUPS ENGINEERING, INC.
CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
1801 N. COLLEGE SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA
July 19, 1968
Board of Directors
County Sanitation District No. 7
10844 Ellis Avenue
Fountain Valley, California
Attention: Mr. Fred A. Harper, Manager
RE: ANNEXATION OF TRACT 6628
Gentlemen:
541-4431
Thank you for ·the prompt action regarding the annexation
of Tract 6628 at your last Board meeting.
However, the condition of having to de-annex from the
Irvine Ranch Water District has presented some new p~oblems.
Mr. Jim Peters of Pacesetter Homes and myself met with
Mr. Bill Eppinger, Manager of the Irvine Ranch Water District,
to discuss this condition of de-annexation. I received from
Mr. Eppinger a copy of a letter from the Water District's at-
torney regarding the service of area within the Irvine Ranch
Water District by the Tustin Water Works Company, a copy of which
is enclosed. As pointed out in the letter and as explained
by Mr. Eppinger, the problem of de-annexation is that of capac-
ity rights in the feeder lines. If this area was to be de-annexed
from the Irvine Ranch Water District, at such time that the
Tusti~ Water Works Company was using its entire capacity rights
through the East Orange County Water District, this subject
area could not be served because it is not now included in the
total area for which the Tustin Water Works has capacity rights.
Further, Mr. Eppinger pointed out that this area is not
now in the improvement district through which the Irvine Ranch
Water District provides its sewer service and since it would
be sewered through Sanitation District No. 7 facilities, there
would be no need for it ever to be annexed to the improvement
district, thus eliminating the possibility of double taxation
to the future homeowners.·
SANTA ANA FULLERTON LAGUNA HILLS VENTURA
TOUPS ENGINEERING: INC.• CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS• 1801 N. COLLEGE• SANTA ANA. CALIF.
Mr. Fred A. Harper -2 -July 19, 1968
Mr. Eppinger will be preseht at your next meeting on
July 23 for a different matter, but he indicated he would be
available to explain in detail the problems of de-annexing this
area from the Irvine Ranch Water District.
Therefore, gentlemen we are respectfully requesting that
you reconsider the condition of de-annexation at your July 23
meeting. Perhaps at that time after reviewing the matter with
Mr. Eppinger, the subject condition might be amended to a
"reconunendation that the Local Agency Formation Commission review
the.de-annexation at their hearing."
We apologize for not having this information available
at your last meeting. Perhaps it would have saved us all some
valuable time. ·
Thank you.
TOUPS ENGINEERING, INC.
JJY~. w. W. Knitz ~ ;£?__...-
Vice Pres ide_!f"( ·
WWK:em
cc: Bill Eppinger
Klug Development Co.
....... ,. ...
MU• '•: •. OA.,.&.
RUTAN & TUCKER
.JAMES e.~ .. .:·ca,si:t.
·es~··fio~c
fllll(\•..., •"' .... S .. [~[G4•RO
tit.,.., -.. Clll M::NCLS..
A•C••A!) .t.. C:•JO.,.i1T
Ll.0Prt4lRO .a, .. A,.P(~
_,(':.,.N tl .... '-'11~8,.'! • .JD.
trr11H-C .. •C~ w. fNUC'-1..
1108CP T •. •&AOLO
C:O;.LCC:" M. CL•111t
Ml\,rOCIO 1'1. ::,AM\. • .:P.
.;c .... -'· ,.,: ,..,
TN').,.A~ 111. DUA' C
ATTORN £YS AT LAW
POST OF'F'•C£ BOX •976
811 NOqTH BFlOAOWAY
-'"'"°'' 11.fUC•C•
GA.,.rtN r. 5 .. a .. "(>1SCll{o(Q
S ... NTA ,t.N.-..CALIF'O~NIA 92702
171'4) S43 • 94•1 • 835 • :!l 00
.,. \ ~··--~~l!..
W. "· ~·"U.l~AV .IA•('"· V."\t'D(
Mlll>BF.•lt • ..... : ., ..
At.t•,U•OC:Q f'C..,·f
•nat•f t..A•S• C•
'IOICllT C. r:-:>:)
JO ..... c. C.ll:MA oa4. JP.
e•~t:c D. WAt..&. .&CC April 30, 1968
-.oS AN~t~£!· Ol"J•t;f
•r. 53:-B•Nll CF c.a.1rco···· BU•lO .. •C
SSO S0Uf'1 F\.C'..,lA Sfqt!T .. •C:• £.YO: !A
,,,.,, ··~"11•:"\•"'60
wa;l.D't' .J. P(~!,:."9
.... : ... cP ~ .... ~=-·--·e• . .1•.
J. ff•'=.,.O~AS cc ..... •£a ::
~•llAY r. GO;.OSO•
•ooc~ro .. o .. •c_. .... o
AO .. At.0 ... .-1111 ... GTO ..
STu•AT r. ""'"t.01111'
1.0$ .ANvE:..£5. :.a.:..·l"OR•ii;. g.oo:7
rc"ci:.i.~•u: ·;?:J• oco ~ .. ez
co .. .i .. c ... c•!-tY
.. .;)NAPC '• •A=1R•S.:"~
JAMCS. t.t••<;•$00f
.J('hOt M. Y•P4~( .. t
AILLIA .. •.l•t~
1.AG1,• ...... ,L. C:. 0C'J•C£
su••t lr.10 .. :,55w.;,;."J~ lh.111.C1NG
2l5ZI P.e.~::o ~r •JAl.rNC·A
LAuUtt.a .. :1.• -s. :: .... roPN:A 9i:6Sl
1£ .. rP .. O>tE I~·~. ~3~ •• cZO•.)
Irvine Ranch Water Distr·ict
3512 Michelson
Irvine, California
ATTENTION: Mr. William Eppinger
General Manager
Dear Mr. Eppinger:
RECEIVED
MAY 3 1968
tR'llNl RJ\Nl;lt
Yll'tlFR DIST.
This letter is written to the Irvine Ranch Water Dis-
trict as a result of the discussion between the Board of
Directors and you at the last meeting of the Board. The pur-
pose of the letter is to confirm the understanding that was
reached at that time that the Irvine Ranch Water District
acknowledges that it is the entity responsible for providing
water to the area being served by the Tustin Water Works, which
area is located in the Irvine Ranch Water District. If at a
later date the Tustin Water Works is serving more water within
the Irvine.Ranch Water District than it is obtaining from
sources other than the East Orange County Water District, ap-
propriate arrangements will be entered into between Irvine Ranch
Water District and East Orange County Water District, whereby
water to be supplied to the ultimate customer will be furnished
by Irvine Ranch Water District.
Would you please acknowledge.that the contents of this
letter are consistent with the understanding reached at that
time.
Very truly yours,
~-;-;, / '~ '· //-?--c... y • .z. ·frl-.C~. (... -• _a_,,_.,,,·t</~{
Alexander Bowie
AB:ct
ENGINEERING
Iii
ENGINEERS o ARCHITECTS
412 SOUTH LYON STREET SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92702 • TELEPHONE < 714> 547-4471
ADDRESS REPLY TO P.O. BOX 178
July 25, 1968
Boord of Directors
County Sanitation District No. 7
of Orange County
Post Office Box 5175
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
Pursuant to your authorization of April 10, 1968, we hove proceeded with
a reappraisal of the annexation fee schedule for the District. We have also
prepared a procedure for annexations of territory to the District with a
suggested fee for processing costs.
In reappraising the annexation fee, the basic philosophies employed in prior
studies were generally followed. Briefly enumerated they are:
1. Excluded areas have relinquished rights in all District
foci lities, existing and under construction.
2. Additional sewerage facilities required within the
annexed areas are to be constructed without cost to
existing taxpayers of District.
3. Existing facilities and those under construction will
serve the existing District for a specific period of time,
and the taxpayers have assumed the obligation and have
the obi lity to pay for these facilities without assistance
from outside areas.
4. After annexation new areas should be on the same basis
as the rest of the District in solving long range future
requirements for sewerage facilities.
In reassessing the present fee schedule, four methods previously used in exami-
nation of the problem were again considered. They are: back taxes, value-
appraisal of lands before and after, value-cost by alternative system, and
area benefit/ cost. Lands considered most likely to request annexation in the
future and which could be integrated into the existing system from an engineering
and economic standpoint were analyzed. These lands, for the most part, consist
of Lemon Heights, Cowan Heights, Orange Park Acres, Peters Canyon and
certain Irvine lands to the southeast of the Browning Subtrunk. Total acreage
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES
· Board of Directors
County Sanitation District No. 7
of Orange County
July 25, 1968
Page Two
involved is approximately 8,800 acres. However, this is not to be m,jscon-
strued as recommending acceptance of any of these areas for annexatlon.
Due to the limited capacities of the existi'ng trunk facilities, only a limited
portion of the study area can be annexed unti I the ultimate system is con-
structed. We will comment about this later in the report.
As a result of this reappraisal it is our recommendation that the following
requirements, of which some are presently in effect, be continued and/or
established as conditions to the annexation of territory to the District.
1. Payment of all costs incurred in processing the annexation.
2. Payment to the District the sum of $250. 00 per acre of
territory so annexed •
3o That annexed territory be subiect to the terms and conditions
of all ordinances pertaining to fees for connection to the
District's facilities.
4. The annexed territory shall be annexed into an appropriate
sewering agency for the purpose of maintaining and
operating the local sewer system including pumping stations
and force mains.
5. The local sewerage system serving the annexation area shall
be installed and connected to the District's system without
expanse to the District. .
6. The territory upon annexation shal I be subiect to al I
ad valorum taxes required for the retirement of the
existing and future bonds of the District.
At the present time approximately 50 percent of the potential connections
within the present District are connected to the District's facilities. Because
of the large number of connections remaining to be made and the capacity
problems in the Gisler-Red Hill Trunk, it is our recommendation that no [arge
areas be annexed to the District unti I the ultimate trunk facilities are con-
structed. Certain fringe areas contiguous to the District, principally in the
Lemon Heights, Cowan Heights, and the westerly section of Orange Park Acres
could be annexed without being detrimental to the best interests of lands
presently within the District. However, before proceeding too far with any
annexation request, the District should evaluate the effect additional sewage
wil I have on existing foci lities. 11. . /'j ~_;u .. c!J.~.; e'-/tr,_li-)/.
Conrad Hohener, Jr., C.E. 10951
pp
81-2908-00-00
BOYLE ENGINEERING
PROCEDURE:
COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 7 OF ORANGE COUNTY
10844 Ellis Avenue, Post Office Box 5175
Fountain Valley, California 92708
{714) 540-2910 {714) 962-2411
PROCEDURE AND FEES FOR ANN EXATl.ON OF TERRITORY TO THE DISTRICT
1. All requests for annexation MUST be in writing and directed to the Board of Directors of
County Sanitation District No. 7 of Orange County.
2. Such written request MUST contain the following:
{a) The true and correct and complete legal description of the territory for which
annexation is requested. TAX Bl LL DESCRIPTIONS AND ASSESSMENT NUMBERS ARE NOT
ADEQUATE.
(b) The names, addresses and telephone numbers of every owner within said territory
and a designation of the portion or the interest owned by each person.
{c) The assessed value of each separate parcel of land within the territory having a
separate asses~ment, as shown on the lost preceding equalized assessment roll of Orange County.
{d) The total number of voters, if any, residing in the territory proposed for annexation.
{e) Said written request must request the District to annex said territory.
3. Fees to be paid; when and how:
{a) When written request is filed, it must be accompanied by a CASHIER'S CHECK
pqyable to County Sanitation District No. 7 of Orange County in the sum of $325. 00. .
Should these processing costs exceed the $325.00 fee, applicants will be requested
to deposit the amount of such excess with the District.
NO PART of this charge is refundable under any circumstances.
(b) The formal petition for annexation is prepared by the District and mailed to
applicant for signature with a letter of instructions and a statement of the additional fees. When
the applicant signs and returns the formal petition for annexation, it must be accompanied by
A CASHIER'S CHECK equal to a fee of $250.00 per acre for each acre to be
annexed. This fee is refundable if the annexation fails.
NOTE: Al I moneys paid to the District must be by cash, cashier's check, postal
or bank money order or certified check. NO PERSONAL CHECKS WI LL BE ACCEPTED.
The above fees are sub iect to change. The fee schedule in effect at the time of
actual payment of any fee is the one applicable.
4. It is the policy of the District not to accept for annexation any irregularly shaped territory
which consists of subdivisions or proposed subdivisions where isolated parcels of property or lots are
excluded from or are not included within the territory to be annexed.
5. It is es~ential to allow 60 days from the time formal petition is signed and fees are paid.
Positively no use of District sewer lines until after date of hearing.
,;; ..
TO: BOARD OF DIRECTORS DISTRICT NO. 7
FROM:. Fred A. Harper, General Manager
RE: Proposed Annexation -Tract No. 6628
COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS
of ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P. O. BOX 5175
10844 ELLIS AVENUE
FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, 92708
The following information has been compiled from a
communication from our General Counsel, dated August 7th, and
from a report to the Board regarding annexations, submitted by
Conrad Hohener of Boyle Engineering, dated July 10th:
General Counsel
· "First--if the area is required to de-annex from the Irvine
Ranch Water District, it will not, according to the opinion of the
County Counsel, carry with it the obligation to pay the bonds of
the Irvine Ranch Water District, which obligation it is now subject
to. This is a radical difference from the operation of a de-annexation
in connection with our own type of sanitation district where a
de-annexed portion does carry the bonded liability obligation as of
the date of the de-annexation. Accordingly, it does not appear that
it will be necessary to require the de-annexation by the Irvine Ranch
Water District of this parcel in order to.avoid double taxation. In
other words, it appears that by remaining in ·the Irvine Ranch Water
District the area seeking to be annexed will not be incurring double
taxation for similar services.
"The other point of concern is that the board has already
adopted a resolution with the de-annexation as a condition to the
acceptance by the district. This is ordinarily a prerogative of
the LAFC organization, and usually the rights of a district as to
approving the annexation are limited to the charges which are applic-
able to. the area to be annexed. However, the recommendation for
annexation with the de-annexation from the water district has gone
forward to the LAFC, and I am informed that they will meet sometime.
in the day before our meeting on August 14. Accordingly, they may
act and disregard our condition requiring the de-annexation from the
water district. If this is true, it may obviate the problem. If
they do not act or they do continue this condition to the annexation
at our request, then the matter will be before the ·board at the
Wednesday night meeting.
"The conclusion I would reach is that there is no legal
obligation or obstacle to proceeding with the apnexation. I have
some reservations about the ability of our.districts to add a
condition to annexations requiring the de-annexation from other
-. ~-
districts of which the property to be annexed is a part. It does
appear that as a matter of policy the board should adopt a program
concerning what property may or may not be annexed and when it can
or cannot be done, bearing in mind the capacities which most direc-
tors are quite concerned about. It appears that the board members
rightfully do not want to annex any property which would preclude
the development of any property now within the territorial limits of
the district by reason of a lack of capacity to transport and dispose
of the sewage being generated within the district as it now exists.
This, of course, is an engineering determination, but I am sure that
the board members are concerned about it."
Boyle Engineering
"Tentative Tract No. 6628 Annexation"
"This is a 20-acre parcel at the southeast corner of Irvine and
Browning Avenues to be developed into e1 single family residential
lots by Pacesetter Homes Incorporated. The tract will connect to
the Browning subtrunk which has adequate capacity to serve the
property providing it is developed as proposed. The effect the
additional flow from this tract will have on the Gisler-Red Hill
trunk will be minimal in relation to the total capacity problem as
recently reported on by our office.
"O'Sullivan Annexation"
" Ludlow Annexation"
"It is our opinion that the above three proposed annexations to
the district will not be detrimental to the best interests of the lands
presently within the district and we recommend the Board give con-
sideration to the requests for annexation.
"Regarding the -annexation fee, we are about to complete the
annexation report and from our research and calculations it appears
a fee of approximately $250 per acre will be recommended to the
Board. You may wish to use this figure in· lieu of the present $215
per acre if any or all of the above annexations are approved. A
final accounting can be made with the landowners if the new fee
varies from $250." · ·
II
BOARDS OF DIRECTORS
County Sanitation Districts P. 0 . Box 517 5
of Orange County, Ca liforn ia 10844 Ell is Avenu e
Founta in Va ll ey, C alif., 92708
(1)
(2 )
(3 )
( L~)
(5 )
(6 )
(7)
DISTRICT No.
AGE ND A
Special Meeting
Ro ll Ca ll
Ap p o intment of Chai r man p r o te rn, i f necessary
Report of the General Manager
Report of t h e Ge n eral Co unsel
Reconsideration of act i ons taken July 10th re l ative
to proposed Annexation No . 17 (Tract No . 6628 ) to the
District ; and further consideration of the communication
dated July 19 , 1968, from Toups Engineering , Inc ., con-
cernin g this proposed annexation
Consideration of Report on District 's Annexation-Fee
Policy and Procedures , submitted by Boyle Engineering ,
dated July 25, 1968
Consideration of motion to adjourn
II
MANAGER'S AGENDA REPORT
County Sanitation Districts
of Orange County, California
JOINli BOARDS
REGULAR MEE TING
Wednesday, August 14, 1968
7:30 p .m.
P. 0. Box 5 175
10844 Ellis Avenue
Fountain Va lley, Calif., 92708
T olephones:
Area Code 714
540-2910
962-2411
August 9, 1968
The following is a brief explanation of the more important non-
routine items which appear on the enclosed agenda and which are not
otherwise se l f-explanatory. Warrant lists are not attached to the
agenda since they are made up immediat ely preceding the meeting but
will appear in the complete agenda available at the meeting.
Joint Boards
Nos . 16, 17 and 18 -REPORT OF EXECUTIVE AND BUILDING COMMITTEES AND
CONSIDERATION OF ACTIONS RECOMMENDED : The Executive Committee met in
joint session with the Building Committee during the afternoon and
evening of July 23 and considered recommendations on Joint Board
business and the individual District budgets . Director Gomez also
met with the Committees as a guest. A complete report of the meeting,
including the recommendations adopted, is enclosed . Item No. 17 is
consideration of action on the recommendation of the Building
Committee relative to the awa rd of a contract for alterations to
the Adminstration office building. Item No . 18 is consideration of
action on the recommendation of the Executive Committee concerning
employment of a consultant to study and report on the subject of
uniform industrial waste charges. The Executive Committee, as a
whole, did not take action on the individual District Budgets since
this is not a Joint Board matter (see Item No . 20).
No . 19 -PRICE DIFFERENTIAL BETWEEN ALTERNATES ON CONTRACT NO . P2-8-3
(ENCLOSURES-PHASE II AND OPERATORS' BUILDING): In accordance with
previous Board action, bids for this job will be received on August
2 9 . As recommended by the Building Committee, the bidders will be
asked to submit quotations for either or both "tilt -up 11 and frame
and plaster construction of the Operators' Building portion of the
job in order that the Boards may determine if the latter is suf-
ficiently lower in price to justify awarding a contract on this basis.
Th e design engineers, John Carollo Engineers, have submitted a l etter
dated August 5 ~copy included in agenda material) recommending that
if the "tilt -up' construction is more than $3900 greater than the
frame construction, the award should be made on the basis of the
latter type of construction . In order to remove any possibility of
an allegation that the award was made to favor one bidder over
another, it is r ecommended that the engineer 's l etter be received and
filed at this time and action taken to establish the $3900 price
diffe rential as a basis of award.
.
I
_ ..
• I
•
• t"'
f .. ~-· .a ""'""' .. J.. • •
No . 20 -REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF FINANCE ON INDIVIDUAL DISTRICT BUDGETS
FOR 1 968-69: On August 2, recommended 1968-69 budgets were mailed
to the Directors concerned, together with a memorandum from the
Director of Finance on this subject. As mentioned previously, these
budgets were also reviewed by the respective District's Chairmen at
the July 23 Executive Committee meeting. Although formal considera -
tion of adoption of the individual budgets will be found as· later
items on the agenda (Nos . 31, 35, 39, 43, 48, 51, 55 and 64), to •
expedite matters the staff will be prepared to go into greater
detail or to answer questions on the budgets following the report of
the Director of Finance .
No. 21 -INSPECTION SERVICES FOR CONSTRUCTION OF OCEAN OUTFALL NO. 2:
It will be recalled that at the J uly Board me eting the General
Counsel was directed to prepare an agreement with John Carollo
Engineers for these servi ces in accordance with the Engineer's
proposal approved at that time. This agreement has now been prepared
and adoption of the resolution, under this item, authorizing exe-
cution of the agreement is recommended .
No. 22 -SALE OF SURPLUS DIGESTER GAS: As previously authorized by
the Boards, bids have been solicited for purchase of surplus digester
gas and will be opened on Monday, August 12 . If a satisfactory bid
or bids are received, a written recommendation for award of this sa l e
wil l be made at the time of the meeting .
No. 23 -CHANGE ORDER NO . 2, JOB NO. P2 -ll: Work on this Plant job,
Headworks "C" at Plant No. 2, is progressing satisfactorily and
should be completed by November . As usual in a job of this magnitude
the desirability of a number of small changes in the work has become
evident, particularly as related to mechanical and electrical instal-
lations . The recommended changes and the contractor's agreed on
additional cost thereof are set forth in the recommended formal
change order, attached to the agenda material, and totaling $1,027.88.
It will be noted that three of the additional cost items, totaling
approximtely $290, are being recommended to simplify and reduce the ~
cost of the work on Job No. P2 -8 -3 (see Item No . 19), which will
commence immediately following completion of the headworks job and
will be located adjacent thereto .
No. 24 -ESTABLISHMENT OF PREVAILING WAGE RATES: This i s the
customary resolution adopted by each District after changes in the
construction industry wage rates have been negotiated between the
unions and the contractors . By adopting this resolution, the pre-
vailing wage rates established are forma lly placed on file in the
Secretary's office for reference in advertising for bids for con-
struction work.
No. 25 -CONSTRUCTION GRANT -OCEAN OUTFALL NO . 2: As reported a
number of times previously, the staff has been quite active in
expediting consideration by the Federal water Pollution Control
Administration 1 s office in San Francisco of the application for a
33% Public Law 84 -660 grant for this project. Although a definite ..
-2 -
..
••
,. I
... ~
• • ..
• . .-~1
Pl -
grant offer has not yet been made and probably will not be made for
several weeks, we have asked for permission to advertise for bids
for the project prior to grant approva l in order that the work can
commence on schedule. Attached to the agenda material under this
item is a copy of a letter dated August 5 from the FWPCA granting
our request and making certain other stipulations which are self-
explanatory. We consider this approval, although qualified by the
statement that there is no commitment thereby made that a grant will
be forthcoming, to be a favorable action by the Federal authorities.
In accordance with previous action taken by the Boards, I have
established a bid date and authorized the advertising of the project
for bid. However to make the record absolutely clear , it is recom-
mended that the Boards ratify my action which calls for bids to be
o p ene d at the Joint Board meeting on October 9.
No . 26 -AUTHORI ZATION FOR ATTENDANCE OF STAFF MEMBER AT MEETING OF
WATER POLLUTION CONTROL FEDERATION: The 4lst annual meeting of the
Water Pollution Control Federation will be held in Chicago from -September 22 through 27. The Federation is the only national
association of persons and firms specializing in the design and
construction of waste treatment and disposal facilities and in water
pollution control activities. This meeting brings toge ther all of
these people at one time for the exchange of information and the
presentation of technica l papers . It has been customary, in the past,
to authorize attendance at these national meetings by one or more of
our personnel. It is recommended that the General Manager be autho-
rized to designate one staff member to attend.
District No. 8 • -
No. 4 7 -RECEIVE AND FILE FINANCIAL REPORT: At the June 12 Joint
Board meeting this report, by our independent auditors, covering the
first nine months of the last fiscal year was received and filed by
the other Districts. A similar action by District No. 8 is recom-
mended at this meeting.
District No. 11 • ~·
No. 54 -TENTATIVE ADJOURNMENT TO AUGUST 28: Chairman Matney has
suggested that it would be appropriate to hold an adjourned meeting
of the Board later in the month of August, primarily to discuss the
proposed service to the Sunset Beach area. If satisfactory with the
Board members, the adjourned meeting is recommended to be held at
4:30 p.m. on Wednesday, August 28, in the District's office.
District No. 3 •
Nos . 56 and 57 -POSSIBLE SERVICE FOR SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 4 (SEAL
BEACH AREA): It was reported at the July meeting that in connection
with the recently submitted Master Plan of Trunk Sewer Facilities for
District No. 3, the staff has been contacted by the staff of Sani-
tation District No. 4 regarding the possibility of sewerage service
• I
-3-
..
-
•
for that District through the facilities of District No. 3 and that
a l etter on this subject would be forthcoming. This l etter has now
been received and a copy is inc l uded with the agenda material.
In a subsequent conference with Messrs . Risner and Stratford
of Sanitation District No . 4, it was suggested that a brief engineer -
ing study should be made to determine the effect of the additional
service area on the proposed ultimate fac i lities of District No . 3
and that it would be appropriate if our District engineers made the
study with arrangements made for their fee to be reimbursed by
District No. 4. Accordingly, we asked Boyle Engineering of Santa Ana
to submit a proposal for this study, a copy of which is also included
with the agenda material. The motions appearing on the formal agenda
under these two item numbers are recommended for adoption in order
to get this feasibility study under way. Following submission of
the recommended engineering study, the staff plans to submit to the
Board a supplemental report covering the economic aspects of possib l e
service to the District No . 4 area .
No. 59 -REPORT OF GENERAL COUNSEL ON LAWSUIT REGARDING MANHOLE
COATING FAILURES: The General Counsel advises that he wishes to
submit a status report on the recent lawsuit filed by the District
against various defendants involved in the installation of the
protective coating in the manholes in the 1958 bond issue construction
work. As reported on when this lawsuit was authorized, this pro -
tective coating, which bore a 5-year guarantee, failed in many
instances to accomplish its purpose.
• District No . 7 r
No . 65 -ASSIGNMENT OF PROCEEDS IN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO . 7: A
formal assignment document has been received from the Contractor
Assessment District No. 7, assigning the assessments, warrants,
monies, bonds, and payments, to Gross & Company, Inc . This is a
standard action in assessment proceedings.
No. 66 -REQUEST OF COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF
A MASTER PLAN SEWER IN SMALLEY ROAD: The Costa Mesa Sanitary District
has formally requested that District No . 7 undertake the construction
of the proposed Master Plan sewer in Smal l ey Road between the San
Diego Freeway and Sunflower Avenue . This sewer is necessary at this
time to serve a proposed tract development on the west side of
Smalley Road at Sunflower Avenue. The Sanitary District has offered
to finance the construction of this facility from the connection
charge funds accumulated in their County Sanitation District No . 7
Main Trunk Fund. At the present time, approximately $28,000 is avail-
able. In addition, this proposed development of 300 homes will
generate another $15,000 in connection charges . The engineer's
preliminary estimate for construction is $42,864.50.
It is the staff's recommendation that the project be approved,
and that the General Manager be authorized to notify the Sanitary
District of the Board's acceptance of their offer to finance this
._.. I .. . ·. ,,,,;,. '•
-4-
• .. . .. ----
..
.. • --I '"i
•
'I
.. !II
facility; and that the staff be author i zed to work with the Sanitary
District staff c o ncerning the financing arrangements.
The following is a tentative time schedule for the construction
of the Smalley Road Subtrunk Sewer:
Au g ust 14
Sept. 24
Board approval of request of Costa Mesa
Sanitary District for construction of
the facility; accept proposal of the
engineer, for engineering design services
•
.... Approve plans and specifications and
authorize advertising for bids
.... -
•
..
.. . ...
• -,
•
..
October 11
October 14
Late Dec.
Open bids
Award contract for construction (60 days
to be allowed for completion)
Completion of the project
•
•
,
No. 67 -CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSAL OF DONALD E. STEVENS, INC., CIVIL
ENGINEER, FOR ENGINE ER ING SERVICES IN CONNECTION WI TH THE PROPOSED
SMALLEY ROAD SUBTRUNK SEWER: In co nnection with the Costa Mesa
Sanitary District's request for the immediate construction of the
Smalley Road Subtrunk Sewer, the staff has asked for a proposal from
Donald E. Stevens, Inc., Costa Mesa, to provide the necessary
engineering services. A copy of this proposal is included in the
agenda .
It is the staff 1 s re commendation that the proposal be accepted .
No. 68 -AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF QUITCLAIM DEED IN EXCHANGE FOR
GRANT OF EASEMENT: The General Counsel recommends the quitclaiming
of an existing easement in exchange for a new easement, at no cost
to the District, in co nnection with the construction of sanitary
sewers in Assessment District No. 7.
l "I.
I
if
. ..
-5-
Fred A. Harper
General Manager
•
..
-
-
•
..
II
MANAGER'S AGENDA REPORT
County San itation Distr icts
of Orange County, California
JOINT BOARDS
P. 0 . Box 5175
10844 ~llis Avenue
Fountain Valley, Calif., 92708
Telephones:
Area Code 714
540-2910
962 -2411
August 14, 1968
Joint Boards
REGULAR MEET I NG
Wednesday, August 14, 1968
7 :30 p.m.
SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT
No . 22 -SALE OF DIGESTER SLUDGE GAS: Earlier in the year the
Executive Committee studied the question of whether it would be
preferable for the Districts to u tilize surplus digester gas for
operating our gas turbine driven generator at Plant No. 2 or to sell
this surplus gas, assuming that a buyer could be found.
It was the conclusion of the Committee that in order to make
an economic comparison, an operating test should be made, using the
gas in the turbine under typical conditions and, concurrently, to
advertise for proposals for sale of the surplus gas. In t h is way the
actual power savings by use of the turbine generator facilities could
be compared with revenue obta i nable from sale of the gas.
This study has now been completed with the opening of bids
(authoriz ed by the Boards on Apri l 10, 1968) for the surplus gas on
August 1 2. The bidding specifications were mailed to numerous firms
but on l y one firm, G. E'. Kadane & Sons, which operates an oil pro -
duction fie l d adjacent to Plant No. 2, chose to submit a proposal .
The o ffer from G. E. Kadane & Sons pro~oses to purchase one million
standard cubic feet of gas per day at $0.09 per thousand cubic feet,
with a minimum payment of $1350 per month in the event thei r require -
ments are reduced in any one month. (The Company reports that, based
on past requirements their usage should average about one million
cubic feet, or more, per day.) The sales contract, if entered into,
would be for a three -year period with an option on the part of the
purchaser to renew for an additiona l two years .
The results o f the operating tests indicate that the new power
savi ngs to the Districts by operating the turbine generator would be
approximately $50 per day, with a maximum of $65 per day assuming a
nearly leve l l oad on the generator and no increase in maintenance
from continuous use of the equipment.
....
'.,{j , . ,.
.J
The revenue to be obtained by sale of one million cubic feet
per day of gas , less Di s tricts' compression costs, would be $73.50
per day under the Kadane proposal. This will fluctuate depending
on their requirements.
On the basis of the above comparison and on the fact that
sale of the gas would allow the Districts to keep the turbine
generator on a standby basis for emergencies, it appears preferable
to sell the surplus g as as proposed . Accordingly, the motion appear-
ing on the formal agenda authorizing execution of an agreement with
G. E. Kadar.e & Sons, is recommended.
I if .. ·~ I I ... •
" .-Fred A. Harper .•r "' "ii
General Manager
•
I ..
• II ..
..
• ~. -•
" ~
... I
I
•I ~
I I
" .,
"" .._
""' •
f
-2 -
p